Who is a Loli? and why? (Lolicon Discussion) (1 Viewer)

[NiteGuardian]

Ok so I have wanted a healthy and adult chat on what or who is a Loli and why they qualify as one with people for a while now, if you have thoughts on Shota (aka Shotacon) you are also welcome to post here.

Please obey the Site Rules and be respectful even if you do not like Loli's yourself (note, I may be the creator of this Topic but I have no interest in Lolicon as I understand it, however I do not judge those who do since it is all fictional anyway).

So I will start this Topic off with my view on Loli Characters, to me they have to meet one of the following:

• Be under teen-age, also known as 0-12
• Be between the ages of 13-17 and act as if they are a child
• Be a fantasy race that are hundreds of years old and are stuck in a little girl's body

That is pretty much it to me as of the time of this post, now I'm curious what you guys think a Loli is based on your understanding of it, you can give examples from Anime, Games, or any other source you wish.

Spoiler: My history with Loli confusion

When I was traveling the internet and I was sharing the fact I loved Ayane from the Dead or Alive fighting games, I was shocked to see I was being personally attacked or even banned and was being called names I will not repeat.

You see Ayane debuted in DOA-1 at the age of 15 (in the Japanese manual) and at 16 by the time the game came to the West, so even though she looked like this:

Or by the time I started playing the games at DOA-2, she looked like this:



I was apparently a real-world child molester for liking her, or so all the haters were telling me at the time, this is a major part of why I have stopped judging people for their sexual likes, I have been on the receiving end far too much already.

I may not share the same views on what a Loli is or have any real interest in the genre, but I am still interested in having this discussion as to what everyone at Undertow thinks qualifies as a Loli and would love to see people share their own history with "borderline" or even full Loli Characters.

Also a chat about what countries allow it or don't and why would be interesting and since the views on this Topic will be evolving and across many parts of Pop Culture from Games to Anime and back, I think "Current Events" is the best place I could place it.

 

[Sickerton]

Since the realm of fiction is a strange, strange place, I only have one rule-of-thumb for this:

If a fictional character is physically prepubescent (as in, do not show signs of puberty) then they fall under "loli"/"shota".

Misty and May from Pokemon are supposedly ten years old. Sailor Moon and Yoko Littner were supposedly 14. Aladdin's Jasmine was 15. And while a few of these are clearly what would be considered "jailbait" in the real world, it'd still be quite a stretch to call any of them loli.

Sasami Jurai from Tenchi Muyo was 708 years old; having lived eight years normally and 700 in stasis. The villain "Baby Doll" from Batman was over twenty years old, but had a genetic defect which halted her body around toddler development. Inhabitants of Neverland are effectively timeless. Anime in general loves the idea of ancient demons/dragons/ect taking the forms of children for giggles. All of these characters have "outs" for not-technically-being-loli, but come on. If you're into their body types, you're into loli.

There are occasional exceptions to this -- like Captain Marvel actually being a little kid despite looking like a full grown man when transformed -- but they're fairly few and far between. It's far more common to see it go the other way.

 

[Someone92]

For me, a loli (and shota for that matter) is a character who is yet of fertile age, or just reached a fertile age. So in the case of female characters it would include all characters that appear to be not older than around 12, and in case of male characters that appear to be not older than around 14.

So from your list I would strike off the second point, and rather call it jailbait.

 

[Huitznahua]

Interesting topic ! I recently wondering myself about some sdt character. Not being a fan of loli myself (and fearing possible legal troubles) : I refuse to do costumes for some characters.
I do not have a well-defined rule but I tend to agree with Sickerton :

If a fictional character is physically prepubescent (as in, do not show signs of puberty) then they fall under "loli"/"shota".

This rule is not well defined because the mangaka, artists and other authors ... tend to happily play with the fan service stuff.

Test :

Spoiler: Who is the oldest

Saya Takagi from Highschool of the dead or Haruka Amami from The Idolm@ster ?

Spoiler: Answer

Saya Takagi from Highschool of the dead is 16 and Haruka Amami from The Idolm@ster is 17

So sometimes, when in doubt, I will personally classified characters in loli because I don't find a satisfactory answer.

 

[Mineur]

This rule is not well defined because the mangaka, artists and other authors ... tend to happily play with the fan service stuff.

Test :

Spoiler: Who is the oldest

Saya Takagi from Highschool of the dead or Haruka Amami from The Idolm@ster ?

Spoiler: Answer

Saya Takagi from Highschool of the dead is 16 and Haruka Amami from The Idolm@ster is 17

So sometimes, when in doubt, I will personally classified characters in loli because I don't find a satisfactory answer.

I've noticed that age is just a number in fiction, even western books etc like Game of Thrones have really weird ages on some chars (which was later changed a bit for the tv-series).

As a big fan of the Index series this always comes to my mind when ppl are discussing ages on characters, that Stiyl Magnus in said show is given the age of 14 by the author when he is a 2m tall dude that looks like he is like ~25 lol.

Spoiler

 

[Clausolas]

I always felt the general rule of thumb is that a loli character is based solely off body type. The way the character acts is irrelevant.

Mildly NSFW picture involved and lots of pictures.

For example,

Spoiler: Nowi, Fire Emblem Awakening

Spoiler: Nah, Fire Emblem Awakening

Two examples from the same game, both of whom are in the "loli" category, yet they have completely different personalities.

Nowi is a fun loving girl who actually knows how and when to be mature. Nowi also happens to be thousands of years old.

Nah is Nowi's daughter in the same game and is uptight, tries to hard too be one of the "mature ones" and ends up being childish because of it. In the Japanese version of the game, she even outright accuses her father of being a lolicon for marrying Nowi (this was changed overseas so if you have played the game, gotten that support, and don't remember it, I don't blame you). Nah is probably no older than 20.

Both of these characters fit into the "loli" appearance. But those are two examples from the same artstyle. Let's expand a bit.

Spoiler: Konata Izumi, Lucky Star

Konata Izumi is an otaku, gamer, and high school student from Lucky Star. It should be interesting to note that she does, in fact, have a canonical height of 142 cm (4 feet, 8 inches)
Compare to...

Spoiler: Kagami Hiiragi, Lucky Star

Who is one of her best friends in the same series and is canonically 157 cm (5 ft, 2 in). Kagami arguably fits herself, but I find her a bit too tall to qualify.

Now, I'll mention a character I know a lot of people will recognize.

Spoiler: Marie Rose, Dead or Alive

Canonical height: 4' 10" (147 cm)
Age: 18 (Just barely qualifying for legal adult in most countries around the world)
And also Dead or Alive's Token Loli character.

All the characters I listed have similar body types (relatively short, petite all around), and fall into the "loli" category for me. Often times though, many things can make it questionable. Art style is, obviously, the big one. All the characters in Lucky Star is drawn in a way that makes pretty much every single female character look incredibly young (and short).

But I feel like I've gone on long enough. Sorry about the long post, but I just felt a little argumentative against the "loli characters are childish" thing that was mentioned in the first post.

 

[morosenoodle]

I'd agree with Someone92 et al. Loli - as I have seen the term used by Japanese artists, and increasingly by westerners - does not refer to personality, but rather to absolute and/or apparent developmental age*. Teens simply aren't loli - lolis are characters who fall below puberty and the AoC as it's traditionally understood in Japan (13 or 14), with older characters (i.e. most anime heroines, from Sailor Moon to Yoko Littner) being either "teen" or "bait", depending on community attitudes. Older characters with adult bodies (petite or fully-figured) and childish attitudes or affectations, these characters might fall into a loli-fashion category, but we can't label them as "lolis"-proper.

*usually both, but could be either one or the other (as with Oppai Loli or, conversely, magical 10,000 yo vampire loli)

 

[NiteGuardian]

So from your list I would strike off the second point, and rather call it jailbait.

I'd tend to agree with you, based on the posts thus far and I hadn't at the time of my original post considered the "jailbait" classification.

I do feel a need to ask "isn't Lolicon/Shotacon basically Japanese Jailbait?" since legal age for sex in Japan is 14, meaning that Lolis (typically under that age) would be their version of the same thing, or am I wrong here?

So sometimes, when in doubt, I will personally classified characters in loli because I don't find a satisfactory answer.

See personally I rule in favor of "when in doubt, assume they are not" in regards to fictional characters, but that is just me and I don't expect anyone to agree.

I always felt the general rule of thumb is that a loli character is based solely off body type. The way the character acts is irrelevant.

-and-

But I feel like I've gone on long enough. Sorry about the long post, but I just felt a little argumentative against the "loli characters are childish" thing that was mentioned in the first post.

See to me, I was aggressively attacked as though it was tied purely to age and attitude rather than body type, so that kind of forced my opinions along that path, I find your view to be interesting and I like it.

Regarding Marie Rose from Dead or Alive, in Japan she is Canonically 16 (as is Honoka) and in all materials released outside of Japan they are 18, basically the Developers covering their own asses due to laws in the Western world. (if you can't tell I hate Censorship! lol)

I found your post enjoyable so don't be afraid to make large posts, specially in discussion Topics and/or with use of Spoilers to help length.

 

[Sausage&Eggs]

I stick with the "if you have to ask" rule if I am unsure.

I think characters who act like a child and have small frame falls into loli. Age is irrelevant at this point which makes 10000 yo demons just as valid a loli as others. That said I think art design also plays a huge role in this. Some styles just lends itself towards the more loli side of things. Lucky Star is a fantastic example.

Age is generally not the best thing to go by because developers can always just add a few years to it or go the stupid very old but young body route. But probably good to take into consideration when looking at the character if the information is also available.

Some interesting characters for thought would be Talim and Tira from Soul Calibur. Both are under legal age from the west's laws but neither really gives off a heavy lolicon feel. Amy on the other hand has her age hidden but her slightly smaller and gothic lolita dress style gives her a much more loli feel.

Tira

Spoiler

Talim

Spoiler

Amy

Spoiler

As someone who likes smaller girls but not quite loli I often find it difficult to draw the line. However I find the childish or over the top cute behaviour irritating and creepy.

Here is a loli character I like but not because I find her attractive instead I find her hilarious.
Mirai

Spoiler

 

[Clausolas]

I'd tend to agree with you, based on the posts thus far and I hadn't at the time of my
Regarding Marie Rose from Dead or Alive, in Japan she is Canonically 16 (as is Honoka) and in all materials released outside of Japan they are 18, basically the Developers covering their own asses due to laws in the Western world. (if you can't tell I hate Censorship! lol)

I actually didn't know that, but it wouldn't surprise me if that were the case. Ayane and Kasumi were both given similar treatments (with having their age redacted as opposed to upped). It's funny, DOA is actually a game I played quite a lot, to the point that I spent hours a day just practicing the game but I guess I got too detached from the story and normal tidbits to really notice something Marie Rose being aged up.

Don't worry, you're not the only one who hates censorship. Do you have any idea how hard it is to find a localized game or anime that's true to it's origin country these days? It's almost impossible.

Also a minor nitpick, and some off-topic semantics on the "phile" words in the spoiler if anyone cares

Spoiler: Semantics

Being attracted to Ayane when she was below 18 would make someone an "ephebophile" (which is the sexual attraction to individuals around 15-19 years of age (and still not older than age of consent in most cases)). Hebephilia is the same, except for people generally around 11-14 years of age, and pedophilia covers most of everything before that. All nude depictions of people within those age ranges are covered under an umbrella of "child pornography", so often many people say that your attraction to anyone under 18 is pedophilia (which isn't technically accurate).

It should be interesting to note that all three of these are the attraction to someone of an age range... because they are in that age range. Which basically means that being attracted to a 17 year old does not make you an ephebophile, unless you are attracted to them because they are 17.

Does that make sense? I feel I could have explained it better.

 

[d£t]

I've never really understood the extreme levels of disgust, outrage and hatred towards people that are seen or labeled as pedo/ephebo/hebephiles. I also find it awfully convenient the age most guys deem suitable for sexy fun times is what's legal for them to try to bone. Any dude who finds someone under that age attractive should have their balls chopped off HARUMPH. I'm specifically mocking guys here because banging teenagers isn't a conversational topic that's comes up around women.

Anyway, I always thought loli/shota was just a sexual theme involving fictional underaged characters, but I haven't really gone out of my way to look up what the INTERNETS thinks it means. I never got the impression their behavior had anything to do with it. Honestly I feel like that concept of a character being hundreds of years old but looking like a little kid exists purely because people freak the fuck out about anything bad happening to children.

 

[Clausolas]

The only thing I can think about the disgust toward pedophilia, ephebophilia, and hebephiles and so on is that it's "corrupting the youth" or something. Basically a "think of the children" argument that most everyone can agree on these days.

But this is a very "chicken and the egg" argument because did the "think of the children" mindset come first or was it found to be disgusting before that and extrapolated from there?

 

[stuntcock]

Anyway, I always thought loli/shota was just a sexual theme involving fictional underaged characters

The character will usually exhibit some combination of physical immaturity, emotional immaturity, and sexual promiscuity. If it's an anime then you can also expect a high-pitched voice and a tendency towards slapstick violence.

In a serious narrative, it's a power-dynamic thing. The adult character has physical strength, social standing, financial security, a car, decades of education, sexual experience, etc... In theory, the adult character ought to be the one dictating the terms of the relationship. But the underaged character can end the relationship (and get the adult incarcerated or lynched) simply by revealing it to the outside world. So the adult needs to either placate the underaged character and treat them as an equal (in spite of their immaturity and shitty decision-making skills), or deceive/terrify them into obedience. Once the infatuation period has ended, the adult realizes that they're effectively trapped in the relationship and can't unilaterally end it ("if you walk out that door, I'm calling the police").

In a typical narrative, it's a more straightforward forbidden-fruit theme. The sexualized underaged character is an obvious temptation; the protagonist demonstrates character by rejecting any sexual advances and guiding the youth towards a better life (viz Socrates and Alcibiades). Or at least making an attempt - viz Taxi Driver. If it's an anime, then the director will probably show off the underaged character with gratuitous costumes and camera angles. This could be interpreted as clever narrative (inviting the viewer to sympathize with the protagonist's sense of uncertainty, discomfort, and temptation) ... but it's usally just cheap fanservice.

I've never really understood the extreme levels of disgust, outrage and hatred towards people that are seen or labeled as pedo/ephebo/hebephiles.

It's a niche activity which can be associated (rightly or wrongly) with real-world harm.

Imagine that your city faced a bizarre crime spree: homeowners awaken to discover that their backyard septic tank has been dug up, spray-painted with obscene graffiti ("POO-FILLED HARLOT" "TAKE IT YOU SLUT" "FART RESERVOIR") and covered in semen. Local scat fetishists would get ostracized pretty quickly.

We live in a world in which children are sometimes abducted and sexually abused. If people think that there's a connection to fiction, then they'll lash out against it and stigmatize its fans. See also: Columbine High School Massacre § Video Games. More substantially, you can find discussion among actual self-identified abstinent pedophiles as to whether they ought to avoid loli/shota fiction (i.e. "does it satiate the user and divert them from more harmful materials, or does it serve to disinhibit the user's unwanted urges?").

 

[Slingerbult]

Interesting topic! I think part of the problem here is that western society (speaking as a European, but the US is no better) has a pretty complicated relationship with sexuality. For example we add a moral dimension to it in a way that would be unthinkable considering other human activities such as eating. This is all part of a bigger picture called sex negativity, where sex is seen as something shameful and something that can "taint", especially women. Virginity is noble and pure, having lots of sex is bad - unless you're a guy in which case it is a bit more ambiguous (but people still talk, especially in more equal countries).

On a more individual level, I think sexuality has a biological component and a sociological component. From a hetero male biological perspective, it makes perfect sense wanting to bone whatever looks and smells like a fertile female, whether it's 14 or 38 years old. (There are evolutionary biological explanations for homo too - very interesting ones, but I won't go into them). The sociological component is probably far greater though, much like we're taught what to eat when we're young. Cattle for example is OK but a fox is not. Yet both have roughly the same nutrition biologically speaking.

So I think hetero guys saying they aren't attracted to underage women aren't lying, they are simply examples of successful social conditioning. You're also supposed to be attracted to women in roughly your age group (with some margins down for hetero men and up for hetero women), so it's only reasonable that well conditioned hetero males will profess to finding teens attractive when they're 20, and 20-somethings attractive when they're 30. If they find teens attractive when they are 50, SHAME SHAME SHAME, right?

The problem is, we're not really educated to talk about social conditioning and what to substitute it with, should you desire to break its bonds. So when people see someone who doesn't conform, that's a big waning sign for a potential rapist, because they themselves might very well be one if they didn't have that social conditioning to fall back on. You need to mow your lawn, because not doing so is a signal that you don't care what the neighbours might think, and that means you could be a problem for the security of all. You've cast aside one level of restraints, the social ones, and that means society needs to trust your own autononomy (or the police) to keep you in-line, and it rather wouldn't. It'd rather you self-censored from conditioning.

 

[Sausage&Eggs]

I've never really understood the extreme levels of disgust, outrage and hatred towards people that are seen or labeled as pedo/ephebo/hebephiles.

One reason is that it is seen as "predatory". Most society view children and minors as unable to make complicated, responsible choices like adults. Particularly in things they do not yet understand. They see it as dangerous especially because some people take negative actions with their given sexual desires. This makes it almost always seen in a negative light despite I think many never hurting any one. I've been called out for dating soemone very small and young looking. But I am also small framed so it balances. Prejudice and people giving others a hard time for no reason is not new.

As for why the major reactions. People like to shame others. Think back to high school and remember how the grade will shame the girls who slept with people or the ones who went behind their gf's back and such things. We see an issue, we outrage because people can. At same time sometimes it is necessary to do it to increase awareness.

 

[NiteGuardian]

I feel like that concept of a character being hundreds of years old but looking like a little kid exists purely because people freak the fuck out about anything bad happening to children.

I would say that the concept of a young looking and acting character that is 100's or 1,000's of years old has been around since storytelling has, so the motivation behind the original use is unknown by now, I do agree the modern use is typically a work-around to not draw hate for having a loli and it is very sad anyone has to do it.

This is all part of a bigger picture called sex negativity, where sex is seen as something shameful and something that can "taint", especially women. Virginity is noble and pure, having lots of sex is bad - unless you're a guy in which case it is a bit more ambiguous

I have never liked this double standard and I don't see a woman who has had lots of sex as any less than one who has had it once or twice, I have to admit I do find the idea of virginity (for all genders) appealing, the concept of being first-timers together is a romantic idea (but lets face it, very outdated).

One reason is that it is seen as "predatory". Most society view children and minors as unable to make complicated, responsible choices like adults. Particularly in things they do not yet understand. They see it as dangerous especially because some people take negative actions with their given sexual desires. This makes it almost always seen in a negative light despite I think many never hurting any one. I've been called out for dating soemone very small and young looking. But I am also small framed so it balances. Prejudice and people giving others a hard time for no reason is not new.

Would I agree a 4 year old can't make these choices about sex for themselves yet? absolutely.
I would argue that finding an exact age for when a individual can make an informed decision is impossible, since we all develop at our own speed based on various stimuli and the choices we make.
I would also argue that it is no more predatory than rape is (and depending on situation not predatory in the least, since the younger person can actually want to do the act) and within the boundaries of fantasy, rape stories and depictions are accepted anyplace adult material is, its sad the same open-minded ways are not used about any niche or fetish.

To Everyone:
I am greatly enjoying reading everyone's thoughts and input so far, if you haven't posted yet I would encourage you to do so, if you have and have anything to add don't hesitate, just please remember to remain respectful of those here.

 

[Sausage&Eggs]

Would I agree a 4 year old can't make these choices about sex for themselves yet? absolutely.
I would argue that finding an exact age for when a individual can make an informed decision is impossible, since we all develop at our own speed based on various stimuli and the choices we make.
I would also argue that it is no more predatory than rape is (and depending on situation not predatory in the least, since the younger person can actually want to do the act) and within the boundaries of fantasy, rape stories and depictions are accepted anyplace adult material is, its sad the same open-minded ways are not used about any niche or fetish.

Exact age is silly which is why later is better and if the subject in case is a little before and nothing really bad came of it we just turn the blind eye. The alternative would be too cruel - to have those who needed the protection unprotected.
The part on decision making goes both ways. Some can younger, some can't and are much older. It is very much case by case however given that an adult's responsibility is often to teach and protect children it is hard to justify it in most cases when it is hard to measure a person's abilities in decision making and understanding of such things. Children are easily manipulated, some are manipulative in themselves and as they are inexperienced in many things particularly things of the society and adult world it isn't hard to see why many view it as best left alone until they are more mature. I do not doubt there are young ones who are committed, know the consequences and desire it. It is all biology and hormones afterall. However I think those who fully grasp the conesequences of it and those who are actually sexually motivated rather than innocently curious are in the minority. Then you need to consider whether the person developed this way on their own or were subtly manipulated into feeling this way. Arguing for the minority is great because often the voice of the minority is small but sometimes when you consider the alternatives and realise the majority would suffer for it then it becomes obvious why the rules are as they are.

The scary thing about sexual predators is that they do not always need to use force. Manipulation is a strong thing. Befriend them, guilt them, entice them, lure them, drug them, bribe them, blackmail, shame them etc. There are so many evil ways one can choose and a child will often not have enough experience in life to see these for what they are nor will they be able to face these with the comprehension and understanding of an adult.

It isn't more predatory than rape. It doesn't need to be either. Any sort of predatory nature towards an innocent is already bad no matter how you look at it. Fantasising is one thing but just like rape fantasies you don't expect the general populous to enjoy it and be ok with it in all places. I personally think rape fantasies are bad but it just an accepted fetish in most society these days. As for why one fetish is in and not another? World isn't fair. Nothing new there.

 

[Slingerbult]

To Everyone:
I am greatly enjoying reading everyone's thoughts and input so far, if you haven't posted yet I would encourage you to do so, if you have and have anything to add don't hesitate, just please remember to remain respectful of those here.

Yes I thought about one more angle the other day on this topic that hasn't been touched upon. Could religion have something to do with it? Judaism for example has a more relaxed attitude to sex in general, boys and girls come of age earlier and incest is even quite a theme in the Old Testament. Conversely, Christianity has always had problems with sex, whether Protestant or Catholic, and what's more - the Christian God is a Child - little baby Jesus. So you have the whole sex = bad, child = sacred dynamic going on.

To this we can add the infantilization of westerns society the last few decades that further strengthens the point that children are infact infallible and sacred and good, and the demonization of non-vanilla sex in western psychiatric practice before to the mix.

 

[Clausolas]

Yes I thought about one more angle the other day on this topic that hasn't been touched upon. Could religion have something to do with it? Judaism for example has a more relaxed attitude to sex in general, boys and girls come of age earlier and incest is even quite a theme in the Old Testament. Conversely, Christianity has always had problems with sex, whether Protestant or Catholic, and what's more - the Christian God is a Child - little baby Jesus. So you have the whole sex = bad, child = sacred dynamic going on.

To this we can add the infantilization of westerns society the last few decades that further strengthens the point that children are infact infallible and sacred and good, and the demonization of non-vanilla sex in western psychiatric practice before to the mix.

For Christianity, I always thought it was "sex for any reason except procreation was bad". But religion is certainly a possibility.

 

[Slingerbult]

For Christianity, I always thought it was "sex for any reason except procreation was bad". But religion is certainly a possibility.

Yes, because while sex is bad, children are more sacred than sex is bad, hence sex for production of children is OK. Ho-ho-holy, the newborn child washes clean the sins of the flesh! But procreation without sex is still even better. Just the child, not the sex please, if you can help it. Hence Mary and Jesus rules all.

(The power of Loli-Jesus compels you to accept my reasoning).