>>211481846,11>>211481846,12>definition of loli / "JS vs JC"
the two things above, if exaggerated enough, can make you think that there's a risk of new people coming to threads and diluting the definition wider and wider over time.
for example, i know of people who would look at high-schoolers and call them loli.
i've seen images and doujinshi incorrectly tagged by such people as well.
if people like that were to come to threads and post basically adult women, that would actually be an unwelcome event, and would defeat the whole purpose of loli threads.
the thing is that, again, in order for that to be a realistic scenario, we have to exaggerate both the two first arguments and the conclusions of them.
i think (i hope) that most people who can use internets and prefer imageboards are smart enough to be able to tell that older girls are not what it's about.
also, for this argument and the one above, the fact that the terms are pretty vague and subjective doesn't help either.>2d vs 3d / "you must like 3d to be considered a lolicon"
i'd say this argument should instead be something like "you must not actively have (or pretend to have) meltdowns over 3d whenever it's mentioned to morally justify your preference".
sure, it's fine to have preferences for any type of loli over the others, but this "i love loli, but also lol kys pedos" hypocritical moralfaggotry is REALLY annoying to observe.
there's a reason why calling people pedophiles in loli threads is always such an effective way to troll.
if people are afraid of either little girls or that insult, why do they even come to imageboards in the first place, let alone have chosen to participate in loli threads?
i really think that normalfags don't belong in our threads. and this also ties back into the first two arguments, reinforcing them.