We should defederate from lemmynsfw
LollerCorleone@kbin.social to /kbin meta@kbin.social – 164 points – You are viewing a single comment
LollerCorleone@kbin.social to /kbin meta@kbin.social – 164 points – LollerCorleone@kbin.social to /kbin meta@kbin.social – 164 points –
Is this image some sort of gospel? In that case, there's no visual or stylistic difference between Hestia and Naruse. Even Rory looks the same as the others. So clearly this image is piss poor at communicating some sort of clear visual definition of Loli.
For the record, out of the lolis, I'd count the first five as looking underage, not just the first one. This is largely due to their giant heads, tiny bodies.
Now here's the image Wikipedia uses for lolicon: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/89/Lolicon_Sample.png/1280px-Lolicon_Sample.png
I think the consensus is that for anyone who is not a Loli connoisseur, lolicon is pretty much defined by Wikis view of it, not some random image that doesn't really clarify much about true Loli characteristics. I have no problem with hentai of adult or ambiguously adult characters. I'm just saying that if you're gonna call it Loli, people are gonna expect the image I linked to.
no? I just did a quick search, found it to be a useful guide, and shared.
yes they are indeed quite similar. hestia is borderline loli at best, but the point remains. Oshino is perhaps the best example of a typical loli character in that image.
Because you're failing to understand what loli actually is. First, there is a spectrum of appearances and styles. But second, that it's really not about age. It's a similar sort of situation to "chibi" which are also not children.
Yes so the characters shown in that pic do fall under "loli" but loli does not only refer to characters that look like that. loli characters can look like adults. they can look underage. they can be adults. they can be underage. they can look like a mix of underage and adult. Wikipedia's example is perhaps the most "extreme" usage of the word, which makes sense since it's trying to provide an example of the concept unambiguously. though a variety of examples are really needed tbh.
I mean you're free to think as you please. but it's clear you'd consider any man who dates me to be a pedophile which is obviously laughable.
Sure then I think it's a communication breakdown. When most people speak of nsfw imagery of lolis and say it's fine, they're talking about stuff like this (sfw example). undeniably a loli, not obviously a child. might be a teen or adult from visuals. The example wikipedia has is the other "popular" type of loli character, who typically do not show up in nsfw content except the most extreme, are considered 'looking underage' and pretty much banned from most nsfw stuff and lemmynsfw clearly has banned it.
To me, lemmynsfw's post seems to suggest the image I shared is allowed, while the image you shared is not. Is this not the interpretation you got as well? When people react harshly, to me I think it's because they are probably looking at that wiki image thinking that's what lemmynsfw is allowing (when it's not).
"loli" refers to both types.