Ishikei’s Comiket Plans? To Love-Ru’s Mikan & K-ON!

    Post Comment »
    Sort by: Date | Score
    Comment by Fonzer
    03:58 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Oh BTW those nipples could PIERCE THE HEAVENS!

    Comment by Anonymous
    03:45 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Please tell me that I'm not the only one that finds the fact that the thread descended into a cockneyed moral debate rather than people actually, you know, enjoying Ishikei's art, a little sad and depressing?

    Comment by Fonzer
    03:53 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    People have time to do that.
    See it as a sankaku complex addiction,people debate stuff,this is their new way of fun and probably check comments after that many times.

    Comment by Anon
    04:08 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I don't visit a lot of forums, SanCon is one of the few (if only) who shoots down moralfags who can't distinguish between 2D and 3D and get all holier-than-thou on your ass.

    Avatar of Shuu
    Comment by Shuu
    06:09 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I am with you. That was the very first thought that came to my mind when the moralfaggotry started. I was about to post something akin to "I miss the times when we would just gather to appreciate the great art" and then got drawn into the debate before I even noticed.

    It is sad and depressing, and not just a little.

    Comment by mazinga
    02:07 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    ya for cute loli

    Comment by Anonymous
    04:29 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    You guys are all dumb. In japan, the age of consent is 14 in most prefectures. Why anyone would be sexually interested in anything younger is beyond me.

    Comment by Anony
    04:51 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Same as in Canada, but that doesn't seem to stop the moral fags.

    Avatar of Shuu
    Comment by Shuu
    06:11 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Quite wrong, the age of consent is 13 by "federal" law, and overwritten to 18 by most prefectures.

    Comment by Anony
    06:34 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)


    The age of consent for heterosexual vaginal sex was previously 12 years of age;[2] in 1890, parliament raised it to 14.[3] The punishment for anyone who breached the law was life imprisonment and whipping, while the punishment for anyone who only attempted to seduce an underage girl was two years' imprisonment and whipping.[4] From March 2008, the Tackling Violent Crime Act became effective, which among other crimes included under the Act has raised the age of consent in Canada to 16. Anal sex still remains at age 18 under section 159, and the new measures still allow for close in age exceptions only between 12 and 16: if there is no more than a two year gap for those 12 and 13, or a five year gap for those 14 and 15.

    Avatar of Shuu
    Comment by Shuu
    06:38 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I wasn't talking about Canada...

    Comment by Anony
    06:51 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    British colonies are all hypocrites its okay for 12 years old back in 1890. Whats the difference between 2009 and 1890 did human life span increased to 1000 years old? Thats why they can hand out 150 to 750 years life sentences in prison judgements when the criminal only serve 2% of the judgement before their life span expires.

    Comment by Anonymous
    05:55 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Am I the only person that doesn't really like Mikan?

    Comment by Anonymous
    01:43 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    that tiny bit of pubic hair in the last pic irks me.

    At least have it actually be pubic hair, or shave that TINY part off.

    Comment by Anonymous
    01:57 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    She's got Hitler pubes.

    Comment by Anonymous
    00:33 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Can't wait for the K-ON one.

    Avatar of Jigsy
    Comment by Jigsy
    23:58 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    The last pic is by Betty on pixiv, not Ishikei.

    Nice troll, OP. :3

    Comment by DnS
    06:05 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Yay Mikan,was expecting these from the start of To Love-Ru

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:39 03/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Let’s face it, we all turn to lolis and freaking HOT 2D images because we never had Girlfriends.

    I speak for all of us here :’)

    (If you do, no surprise u keep this secret away from her) lololololol

    Comment by LOPETEGOZ
    06:51 05/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    black_hair blonde_hair blue_eyes blue_hair bra breast_measuring breasts brown_eyes everyone

    Comment by Photoshark
    11:37 03/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Do you know that there are a number of UNICEF and WHO workers that are pedophiles and have diplomatic immunity in the country they are stationed?

    Now, now, they should fix their ranks first before butting into an otaku culture in a country with the least cases of real life pedophilia.

    Comment by Metalbunny
    01:33 03/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    well ...that's better than real life loli..

    Comment by Anonymous
    05:19 03/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    WTF? If a human (male or female) has grown the needed genitals to fuck and wants to fuck said human is old enough to fuck.

    This was right for all human evolution, why should it be wrong now?

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:19 28/11/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I see people calling upon moral and telling lolicon pedo. Well to those i say: If you came here it is because you actually took more ressource on earth that you deserved. Ressource needed by other being in order to survive so in a way your a murderer.


    Comment by Anonymous
    08:04 13/11/2011 # ! Neutral (0)

    Even if a feeble minded feminist troll under "anonymous" desires to conflate cartoon characters with flesh & blood human beings, To-Love-Ru character Mikan in the years running series started at age "12", so this Mikanal hentai based upon the character's physical blooming "appears" to be hitting her 13th birthday - totally morally legal according to Japan Federal Law of 13, and some Iberian European countries & the laws of all the World's religions... and almost Barely Legal according to many Central & Eastern European countries. Any rational human being knows that fixed menstrual cycles is Nature's design & green light to feck. Recalling when I was 13 & in Grade Eight, I NEVER met a classmate who was heterosexual or bi-sexual would didn't want to boink a hot 13 year old classmate... and get arroused by her - so how can it be wrong or unnatural? Should 12 year males only be allowed to fap to women in Playboy in their late twenties or so, old enough to be their mothers?.. You'd think that feminazi trolls would think THAT is pedophilia.

    "The publicity created by Butler’s England feminist tabloid press campaign spread to the United States, which soon saw the rise of its own liberal religious feminist movement to raise the age of consent. As of 1886, twenty-five of the American states, following earlier English law, had an age of consent of 10 years; four states, following Christian canon law on marriage, had an age of consent of 12; Delaware, following Christian canon law on the age of discretion, set its age of consent at 7.
    The "drinking alcohol is a sin" Women’s Christian Temperance Union and various allied organizations conducted petition drives and lobbying to raise the age of consent in the states and the District of Columbia.

    Initial successes sparked a backlash in some states; in 1892, the New York Senate, which had previously raised New York’s age of consent to 16, considered lowering it back to 10. Reflecting a split between liberal and conservative views on the subject, reports from Texas indicated that older men tended to favor retaining a low age of consent while younger men favored raising it. Nevertheless, by 1895, liberal religious "sexuality is a sin" feminist reformers succeeded in raising the age of consent to between 16 and 18 in twenty-two states. However, those states reflecting the most conservative religious views – those in the South – lagged in raising their age of consent. Alabama, Mississippi, North Carolina, and South Carolina kept their age of consent at 10, while Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia set their age of consent at 12 (thirty-something Joseph marrying 12 year old virgin Mary, rockers Jerry Lee Lewis & Elvis anyone?). But eventually, these states as well raised their age of consent.

    By 1918, the Catholic Church finally raised its permissible age for marriage from 14 for males and 12 for females (remember Brooke Shields in the film Pretty Baby getting married at age 12 in all legality in an American Roman Catholic Church?) to 16 for males and 14 for females. To this day, in a number of underdeveloped, predominantly Catholic countries, it is common for adult males to marry and impregnate barely pubescent girls. In Mexico, adult men may wed girls of 14 years of age or even younger".

    Comment by Anonymous
    20:33 09/11/2009 # ! Neutral (0)


    Comment by Anonymous
    02:45 15/08/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    After Ishikei, Mosha is probably my 2nd-favorite hentai artist. His style is less detailed and smooth than Ishikei's (you might say the style is more "sketch-y"), but there's just that certain je ne sais quoi in Mosha's work that you can't find in Ishikei's (and vice-versa).

    There's also Naoshi Onizuka, who is responsible for such masterpieces as "Life is Peachy?" and "Lovable." He doesn't do any singles - just doujins - and very rarely does anything in color (except for the cover pages of his doujins). His style can be characterized as much more "simple" or "pure" than that of Mosha or Ishikei. However, this simplicity allows for more expression in Onizuka's works. He is probably my favorite doujin artist (rather than favorite overall).

    No, wait, cancel that. My favorite doujin artist/circle would definitely be Urotan. Known for such masterpieces as Milkie Strike, Milkie Strike 2, and Cream Korone Syndrome (among others), Urotan's strong points are mouths, hands, and cumshots. Heck, just go check out Milkie Strike (which has been hard-translated into english) and Milkie Strike 2 (soft-translated into english and available on the channel). And what I said earlier, cancel that, too. Urotan is definitely my favorite hentai artist. Ishikei takes second.

    Comment by hALOTOO
    12:40 06/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    There usually an omake (not colour ) before his next project.

    Comment by keikei
    20:27 28/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I've been seriously thinking, is there a better (more skilled) artist in hentai? I cant think of any. Shiwasu no Okina is great but not as great skill-wise as Ishikei. He's just too awesome and even so you can still see progress in his newer works, he gets ever better. I dunno, i just find his style and technique amazing, i have most of his mangas and i dont really read them i just stare at the artwork and wonder how can he be that good :D

    Anyone knows of an artist/circle with similar quality of artwork as Ishikei?

    Comment by Anonymous
    00:52 03/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Last Yui picture was not drawn by Ishikei, nor was it posted on his website.

    Comment by Anonymous
    16:09 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Whats up with these 2D lolis are immoral/wrong talk. I have a 28-year old friend that is purely is on to loli anime characters and never ever in his life that he had interest in 3d/real lolis.

    Comment by Anonymous
    11:38 03/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Let's face it, we all turn to lolis and freaking HOT 2D images because we never had Girlfriends.

    I speak for all of us here :')

    (If you do, no surprise u keep this secret away from her) lololololol

    Comment by Anonymous
    01:02 03/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Good for your friend? But we can't say the same for all can we?

    Avatar of sanimej2
    Comment by sanimej2
    Comment by clannadfanboy213
    23:34 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Nice to see a hentai pic that is both sizzling hot and encourages use of condoms. :D

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:50 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    The nipples in that first pic can put your eye out.

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:41 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Um no i would'nt because preschooler or elementary student is a real child and this is just a picture of an anime character jack ass lol

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:53 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    But the pictures do actually depict a nude child who is about to have sex though. :\

    Avatar of Shuu
    Comment by Shuu
    20:38 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)


    Comment by Splat
    05:23 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    "I know maturity differs for each individual but the majority would pretty much reach the same point at the same time, save for a few special individual."

    May I ask what you base this assertion on?

    It has been my experience that, above everything else, it is the environment in which an individual grows up that controls how quickly they reach "maturity", if we can even quantify such a vague and elusive concept. Followed by what would be best described as individual variation or genetic predisposition... but even that barely has any effect compared to environment.

    Consider, for a moment, two individuals. One grows up living the perfect carefree life, enjoying every comfort of modern society and the love and devotion of his or her parents. The other grows up in a time of war, losing loved ones and suffering hunger and distress almost every waking moment. Do you really think they'll mature at the same rate?

    And if you think that example is too extreme and nothing but a marginal case, then what about an individual growing up in the average suburban setting compared to one growing up in a family that struggles financially? What about one growing up in an average middle-class family with loving parents and the other in a only slightly more poor family, but with an abusive parent or perhaps merely a divorce?

    No, I just don't see how you can honestly claim that people mature at the same rate. It's the sum of our experiences that determines who we are, not how many seasons came and went since we were born.

    "So should we accommodate for the minority or the majority?"

    Apart from the above criticism, I also have to disagree here. If we want to live in a free society, we shouldn't bias our public policies to better accommodate for any minority or majority. Instead, we should try to accommodate for everyone so long as said accommodation doesn't inflict harm on anyone else. In other words, find common ground where possible and turn a blind eye to things we don't like so long as they aren't harmful to us. And by "harmful" I mean real harm, not "other people doing this hurts my feelings/sensitivities/etc".

    Now, naturally it won't always be practically possible to achieve this to the point of perfection. But it is what we should aim for. Instead we see more and more people expecting society to adhere to their personal set of standards and morals and, indeed, feel they have a right to demand it or even get their way by force (of law). The law is there to protect people from harm and punish those that inflict it on others, not to enforce your moral standards on everyone else.

    "As for the argument made against a legal age, so what do you suppose we should do? Impose a mandatory test for all children so as to see if they can pass the mature enough to have sex test?"

    Oh, there certainly is considerable practical merit to having a standard age of adulthood, at least for legal purposes. But it's important to never forget that it is rather arbitrary and merely serves legal purposes, rather than some natural, objective standard. And it's the latter that is implied when people, for example, call lusting for someone who isn't 18 yet "disgusting", "unnatural" and the like.

    As for a "maturity test"... well, that might not be such a bad idea. But why impose it? It seems far better, and more practical, to leave the 18+ as the default and give people the option of taking such a test to bypass that standard provided they've reached puberty. That would certainly prevent nonsense like 18 year-olds being thrown in jail for having sex with their significant other just because they've passed the magic 18 mark and said significant other hasn't.

    But even that isn't necessary. All it would take is for people to realize that the law isn't an objective standard of right and wrong, nor is it meant to be. That it is imperfect, being but an attempt to put the vague concepts of right and wrong into words. That, ultimately, the only thing that matters is whether the PURPOSE of the law is served, not whether it is executed word for word. And that said purpose is to protect the people, not to suppress them or impose the moral standards of one group on another.

    Comment by Anon
    04:44 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I think people are talking about people who can't. The people posting long ass post here probably don't have problems doing that or need any raising by their parents.

    Comment by Anon
    04:34 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    tl;dr: 2D is not real. Get if right, moralfag. If you don't like it, don't look at it.

    If you think it's real and fucks up with your mind, then go back to being raised by your parents; an adult is supposed to know the difference between fantasy and reality.

    Comment by Meidoganekko
    00:36 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    After those blocks of texts and self proclaimed philosophies of yours, you finally failed as you start recycling the seriously same old ideologies of imaginary pixels will bring total reality disasters and for still believing on the magical number 18. Seriously, what's so awesome about that particular number that people turn it into AOC, that some/most idiots also apply it to mere fantasy girls? Human beings tend to be retarded and still act childish even as someone who's above that age so there's no such thing as "If she's 18, she's EXACTLY a mature adult".

    Not to mention your butthurt expression for finally spitting the typically overused "You Pedos should die (for being not moralistic like me)!"

    Now enough of this and go to bed, Little Bob.

    Comment by Anonymous
    00:31 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I do not in anyway believe every thought being promoted right now to be the "right" thought. It is a constant evolution. Things will keep changing according to a wide range of variables. I was merely stating that it was a fallacy to assume that practices promoted in olden times should continue to exist just because of hierarchy. It existed long before, therefore it should? That kind of thought is just dumb (do note that although I am currently engaged in this conversation with you, you have to remember this with respect to why I said that at first)

    I don't know if you get what I have been saying, I guess it didn't go across. I have been stating that there isn't a universal right or wrong, just a set of norms that a group of people living under similar conditions believe to be so. Though you can look at it from a more personal view (the bit about personal happiness and fulfilment), I think laws should exist to protect the young simply because it is a grey area seeing that exploitation can occur too. If an adult ask a minor for sex and she/he says yes, there won't be much that I can say. But what if an adult approaches a minor, befriends her/him, gains her/his trust, in-calculate his own set of opinions in her/him, threatens her/him and so on? Are we to stand by and just let it be?

    I know maturity differs for each individual but the majority would pretty much reach the same point at the same time, save for a few special individual. So should we accommodate for the minority or the majority? As for the argument made against a legal age, so what do you suppose we should do? Impose a mandatory test for all children so as to see if they can pass the mature enough to have sex test? An age has to be set and it differs for each country according to their own cultural beliefs; I don't think it isn't such a bad idea.

    Avatar of Shuu
    Comment by Shuu
    00:00 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    "So that correlates with what I said about things being different now right? The past and now operates under vastly different conditions and set of rules. What was once the norm, won’t stay the norm, and we aren’t even going into the right or wrong domain yet."

    In general, you're right of course. Not every development is a positive one though, and history will show that the world aimed for by today's oh-so-righteous moralists would carry with it a huge set of injustices and wrongs of it's own. I dare say even more than is the case now. It's a huge mistake to assume that every development that occurs as humanity evolves will eliminate wrongs and replace them with rights. The desexualization of minors has passed the point of being actually helpful and positive to them (children being thrown in jail for taking pictures of themselves for private use? How very right.), and further restriction of free expression on behalf of morals will prove to have devastating effects in the near future.

    Let's venture into the "right and wrong domain" a bit more. You need to accept that there is no such thing as universal rights and wrongs. To stay with the topic of underage sex: it can leave feelings of regret and shame in some, and genuine happiness and fulfillment in others. It depends on the individual. What is underage anyway (see Splat's reply for what pretty much are my thoughts on the matter)? Who is to judge what is right and what is wrong for everyone?
    The closest thing to universal morality we get is liberalism and the harm principle. And yes, things have definitely gotten better over the past few hundred years in this regard. Human and civil rights (also for children!), equality, freedom of information etc. etc. Right now, things are starting to go backwards again. I would be more cautious about praising the change of norms.

    tl;dr: if you're too lazy to read then GTFO.

    Comment by Anonymous
    00:48 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Run along now little maid boy, we are trading arguments, not random ill formed insults.

    Comment by npal
    01:39 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Oh noes... Mother Nature seems to believe that people should have sex long before supposed adulthood.


    Comment by Fonzer
    01:19 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Oh shut up,these stupid arguments just repeat themselfs it's very simple.And stop trying to waste your times on such long comments.

    2d does not exist in reality,shows a character,is not human, doesn't really show humans,is a created connection of lines collor and pixels.

    It's fiction fantasy and freedom of speech 3F RULE.

    2d does not connect pedophilia to 3d.It only exists in the 2d world.
    Anything other is your own fault for being fail.

    Avatar of Shuu
    Comment by Shuu
    06:02 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Instead of adding another brick to the wall of text, I'll just say that I agree 9001% with what Splat wrote.

    Avatar of LunarSD
    Comment by LunarSD
    06:05 02/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)


    Pretty much the only notes you'll ever need to take on the average self-described "moralist"'s self-described "arguments".

    So when should puberty begin in their personal little microcosm?

    When the human animal turns 18, they should start having erections and ovulating?

    Because for most of us that starts 7-9 years earlier, when our ancestors were breeding, and where our instincts begin picking up on the observable percepts of sexually viable mates. All animals begin breeding upon puberty, that's why it occurs when it does, humans aren't magically special.

    And as for "The past and the now operate under vastly different conditions and sets of rules", there is a latency which you gleefully wish to ignore. Real evolution takes millenniums to occur. Cultural evolution takes generations well into the lower half of the single digits.
    In a way, it's not a terribly bad idea that humans should age slower and begin their sexual impulses at 18 to account for the rising complexity of society. But the latency makes this impossible.

    In the meantime, here's a study for everyone to consider:

    "...according to Nagayama Hall, Hirschman & Oliver, more than 25% of a sample of normal men reacted with arousal to pedophilic stimuli. So, we're not talking about a small deviant minority, but about a normal variance in human beings - in an era in which anyone who reacts like this would be considered a monster by most people."

    Comment by Anonymous
    23:33 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)


    Avatar of Shuu
    Comment by Shuu
    22:09 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    It had nothing to do with children being "exploited" because they were denied basic rights (which is true, but is not the cause for this), and everything to do with people's life expectancies being 50 years or less.

    It's also just not true that humans used to eat each other. There's a natural aversion to cannibalism built into our genes, as it would be counterproductive to our species' preservation (and to that of most other species). The same applies to incest. It is actually the advent of intelligence and culture that brought about those deviancies.

    Comment by Anonymous
    21:51 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    "Not in Japan or in many other places. Thinking sex with adolescent girls is wrong is a very recent phenomenon."

    I wasn't talking about having actual sex with minors. I mean the sexual images (both 2D and 3D) are frown upon in many societies.

    As for the sex with adolescent being wrong is a recent thing, well, humans evolve. They question their own surroundings, their own genetic makeup, everything. They look for answers within things they are curious about. They use to eat other humans, procreate with their siblings, kill/hate other humans who look remotely different from themselves (still do I guess), witch hunts, etc. As far as history shows, humans don't always make the best choice. They evolve with the times according to the new knowledge we have acquired.

    Human rights and free speech are also new phenomena, even more so than not having sex with adolescents. Should we not give them credit base on your argument about things having a shorter history, therefore being less credible? Children being exploited in the past because they don't have a voice doesn't mean it was right. It just meant they had no choice in the matter because of societal norms, and we all know norms does not equate to being right.

    Comment by Anonymous
    22:27 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    "It had nothing to do with children being “exploited” because they were denied basic rights (which is true, but is not the cause for this), and everything to do with people’s life expectancies being 50 years or less"

    So that correlates with what I said about things being different now right? The past and now operates under vastly different conditions and set of rules. What was once the norm, won't stay the norm, and we aren't even going into the right or wrong domain yet.

    "It’s also just not true that humans used to eat each other. There’s a natural aversion to cannibalism built into our genes, as it would be counterproductive to our species’ preservation (and to that of most other species). The same applies to incest. It is actually the advent of intelligence and culture that brought about those deviancies."

    As for your comments about cannibalism and incest, I think what you said might apply to certain regions of the world but I wouldn't call it the bible truth for human history. Many regions and cultures practice vastly different rituals that would seem strange to our modern or unfamiliar eyes. Technology has and is playing a big part in refashioning a set of norms according to the predominant voice of the modern world.

    Comment by Splat
    23:19 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    The sheer inanity of some of the beliefs moralists have would be very amusing if not for the unfortunate fact that their incessant scheming and meddling are such a pain in the ass.

    I mean, think about it. These people have actually subscribed to what can only be described as the faith that even so much as thinking sexual thoughts about girls - real or merely a pattern of pixels on a screen or some ink on paper - is utterly disgusting and reprehensible. Until, of course, our little rock of a planet makes exactly - to the day - 18 full orbits around our unremarkable little sun since the day said girls exited their mother's (potentially imaginary) vagina. At which point it magically becomes perfectly acceptable to fantasize about them, take pictures of them, get them naked, give their pussies a nice pounding with your hard cock, or whatever else floats your boat.

    BUT NOT UNTIL THEN. Oh no. Even a day earlier than the 18-orbits-celebration and you're a disgusting piece of shit if you even so much as think about it. And, of course, you deserve to rot in jail (and later burn in hell) if you have the audacity to even so much as possess patterns of ink or pixels that form what appears to be images of imaginary girls with over-sized eyes and disturbing lack of nose who look like they haven't reached their imaginary 18-orbit-day but are already engaged in acts of exposing or, worse, using their mouths, mammaries or that unspeakable thing in their nether regions for anything that might be considered indecent. ROT IN JAIL AND BURN IN HELL I SAY!

    [Queue national anthem and look up at flag with hand over heart and tears in eyes]

    Comment by Meidoganekko
    22:35 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Dear Anon, while you and those so called perfect societies frown on ppl who jacks on 2D lolis and found them disturbing, i found that your extreme disability in distinguishing between 2D and 3D a million light years far a lot more pathetic.

    To be honest, ppl who thinks that 2D lolis are supposed to be treated and frowned upon just like sexual images of RL children is equivalent to freaky otakus who think (in a serious way) that their dakimakuras and figures are their real soulmates..

    Avatar of Shuu
    Comment by Shuu
    21:28 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    I was referring more to the renowned lolicons of the islamic world actually...

    Disclaimer: I know that porn is even more frowned upon in Islamic countries, but the idea of minors having sex sure is popular there.

    Should have known this would happen and just have refrained from adding in the "western". Let's face it, Japan basically is a western society.

    Comment by Anonymous
    21:11 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Are you implying that only westerners find this immoral and wrong? I think pretty much anyone who is unfamiliar with the whole 2D culture finds it immoral and wrong, regardless of race, religion or country or residence. And even within the community, there are plenty who don't exactly enjoy it either.

    Avatar of Artefact
    Comment by Artefact
    21:21 01/07/2009 # ! Incalculable

    Not in Japan or in many other places. Thinking sex with adolescent girls is wrong is a very recent phenomenon.

    Comment by Anonymous
    21:17 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    And the fervent displays of the right to enjoy loli is also one of the major reasons why otaku are seen as creepy and disgusting within Japanese society. Defend it to the ends of the earth, enjoying pictures of loli will never be seen as positive or desirable. It might be drawn, it might be pictures of real children, ultimately the pictures show children in a sexual manner.

    Comment by Anonymous
    19:54 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    you got a point.
    even though i dont like loli, someone must explain this to major groups like UNICEF

    Comment by Waterfall Towers
    20:01 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    Mail some pictures to them to illustrate your point.

    Comment by Anonymous
    20:03 01/07/2009 # ! Neutral (0)

    And the comments that people leave

    or perhaps this whole website

    Post Comment »


Recent News

Recent Galleries

Recent Comments