Jump to content

Talk:Shotacon/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

This article needs some updating...

I changed the text in the opening paragraph a bit and added some information in other spots. Please post messages here rather than just deleting my additions or going back to a previous version. Also, could someone please update this article with current information about the legality of shotacon in the United States? I think this article and the one for lolicon should be very similar on topics that apply to both of them. --Temoshi 00:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I am going to begin deleting portions of the article that have yet to be backed up such as the section below, unless said section can be backed up.

shotacon is a direct offshoot of child pornography and may lead to child sexual abuse, backed by studies done on the subject by the NHC (formerly the National Children's Homes).[citation needed] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.99.187.99 (talk) 18:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Older comments

In currently running anime, Detective Conan, whose hero is a high school detective whose body was shrunk to a boy, can be considered a politically correct example of Shota-con.

ehm, the serie has absolutly nothing todo with yaoi. I moved this here

Edit: It is not only yaoi represented through shota, but there is also straight shota. Detective Conan (US: Case Closed) Depicts Conan's attempt to resume life as a detective, fruitlessly, as well as remain friends with his, now older, "friend" (ie. love interest).

Is there a term for the female equivalent of shota-con? Would be useful as a link for the child pornography page...anyone know? Can't turn much up on Google, it's difficult to construct a search. Am expecting a visit from Special Branch any time now, by the way. The things we do for research... --AW

Yes. It's "lolicon", from Lolita complex.

Derived from "Shotaro complex", Shota-con...

What does "Shotaro" refer to? --Brion

shotaru is an anime character in a very old anime and they named shotacon after him becuase he was considered very cute.

I think what I just added (it being a typical boy's name) is correct, but it's been so long since I read around the subject, I can't be sure. --Camembert
Yup, matches with what I read when looking some stuff up last night. There's an interesting site with a quite *amazing* bunch of definitions relating to this subject on it. However, i've read an alternative definition somewhere, dealing with just the term "shota" - it said that "shota" meant "first time". Any Japanese speakers around who can confirm / deny this? I'm sticking with Camembert's addition for now, since it seems more credible (and is given as the definition by more sources, I think). --AW
According to Jeffrey's online dictionary, "shoutaiken" is "first sexual experience". The initial kanji is more often read as haji or hatsu, but does mean first.
According to sources I have read, who "Shoutaro" is as I wrote. "Shotaiken" does mean "first time" but this is used strictly for the female's loss of virginity in the sexual context, which makes it unlikely explanation for this word here.
Revth 07:55, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Legality of Shotacon in the US

Is shotacon/lolicon considered to be child pornography and illegal in the United States in it's anime/manga form?

I would not believe so because as long as it is animated and not actual footage it must be considered as artwork. Artwork has no legal limitations.
PROTECT Act of 2003 --Isequals 23:21, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
You are wrong about this. Please see the Wikipedia article on Lolicon which discusses its legality in the US. It is presently illegal, and in retrospect, so is Shotacon. On 30 April 2003, President George W. Bush signed into law the PROTECT Act of 2003 (also dubbed the Amber Alert Law) which again criminalizes cartoon child pornography.
In actual fact, cartoon child pornography is legal as long as it has not been drawn to look real. By definition, Shotacon is anime, which has not been drawn to look real, and so it is legal. What you are thinking about are 'pseudo-photographs', which are illigal. J Milburn 08:57, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
No, under the PROTECT Act, any work that depicts sex invlolving someone under the age of 18 is considered illegal. This is so broad ranging that it can cover shota or anime, or even something like sculpture.
If this were true, a good portion of hentai would be illegal in the United States, which doesn't seem to be the case at the present moment. Otherwise, the law is too broad, and may not be applied too rigorously. Homologeo 06:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
I have to agree. A fair portion of hentai that is brought to the states depicts girls below consentual age engaging in sex. In many cases they are said to be much older than they look to make it more acceptable as a whole when it is quite obvious that the characters are not of age. --TriggerOfHel 04:28, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Either way, be careful. US law has been a bit odd lately. Also, in Canada, it is specifically illegal, or at least the courts treat it as such. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.96.127.221 (talk) 15:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Forget where I heard this, but I'm sure the protect act was overturned as unconstitutional. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.66.47.150 (talk) 05:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Romanisation

Please pick one romanisation and stick with it. Is the "Sho" with a long or a short vowel? Currently the kana at the beginning of the article suggest that it would be short, so "shoutacon" (or possibly "shōtacon") would be incorrect ... however, if "Shotaro"'s name was spelled 小太郎, that would indicate a long vowel and mean that "Shoutaro" and hence "Shoutacon" (or possibly "Shō...") is the correct spelling. In that case the kana at the beginning would need to be changed too. 82.110.178.63 19:59, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Japanese romanization certainly is standardized enough to say that "shouta" is an incorrect romanization of ショタ. Certainly, one can say that both "syota" and "shota" are equally valid, but "shouta" is not correct in any Rōmaji system. 208.180.124.100 04:36, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

We use Hepburn, so "shota" it will be. Shinobu 22:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
Vowel shortening is part and parcel of the Japanese "clipping" process. "Personal computer" is パーソナルコンピュータ pāsonaru konpyūtā with a long ā in the first syllable, but the clipped form is パソコン pasokon with a short a. Shortening the first vowel of 正太郎 Shōtarō in the clipped ショタコン shotakon is the same thing. Angr (talk • contribs) 12:09, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

question

i can't seem to locate any shotacon imageboards.

i am looking for one similar to renchan.org ( i am a lolicon fan as well...)

any leads?

Yes. www.not4chan.org
www.not4chan.org is down. Anything else?
The article once had links to other shota-containing imageboards, but someone removed them. Here's the old version of the article that had the links on the bottom of the page. Calicore 06:41, 29 July 2006 (UTC)


another question

The page used to name the older and younger in such relationships. There is one Japanese word for the adult protagonist, and one for the young boy that is the subject of their attention. I see these words have been removed. What are these words? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.148.5.119 (talk) 04:32, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Before you bring down the gavel...

I have a long time believed that an equivalent picture for this article has been needed for a while, and so I finally located a decent picture towards that end. I thouroughly expect their to be screaming, crying, finger-pointing, and many wavings of pitchforks from angry villagers--be that way! This is about archiving and journalizing for reference purposes, and now all I need is the author's name and the book's ISBN. Sweetfreek 20:37, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

The ISBN is 4-7901-1069-9. [1] There are many authors (each contributing with one/some of the stories). Should everyone be mentioned?
The angry villagers/religious conservatives will, of course, arrive at any moment, yes...

Please, anyone knows about a shota artist named poju? And other call "Frenchie"? Where could i found their works? The Home page of mr. Poju don't have much images. And, the groups and blogs about Shota are ilegal? Anyone knows some shota anime like boku no pico?(a hentai shota)

Images?

I am all for open expression on Wikipedia, however i'm not certain that the images placed on this article are really necessary, in fact i'm wondering if they should be removed quickly due to the revised laws in the United States. --Intimidatedtalk 05:06, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

These pictures are perfectly legal.08:40, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
The PROTECT Act only illegalized sex images. These ones should be okay. Ashibaka tock 23:29, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

"Shotacon as a meme"

This section is basically without merit... first off, I think it's a terrible misuse of the term "meme." If it's the kind of thing people think and communicate about, it's probably a meme; there's no reason to label "shotacon" as a meme any more than anything else there's a wikipedia article about. The word doesn't mean "thing that circulates on the internet," despite 4chan and online quizzes using the term that way. Secondly, the section is basically just a description of Bridget and how popular he is. I have no objection with mentioning Bridget as a popular shota character, but there has to be a better way to do it.

If you feel you know about the topic at large, and can find Wikipedia:reliable sources, then please edit the article. Perhaps it'd be best to trim it down to what we can source, then build it up as sources become available. Be bold. -Will Beback 07:45, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

"Shotacon Publications"

Some time ago I added a stub for shotacon publications, that would cover some common anthologies. Soon after, someone deleted this, with no explanation or additions to the discussion page. What is the general consensus about whether or not this should be included in this article? For the time being, I'll add the section back, with a few titles to start out. -Temoshi 22:43, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

I think it was deleted because there were no publications listed before. Calicore 04:11, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Fair use

We currently have two fair use images on the same page. Thus clearly one of these is not fair use, and is instead a copyright violation, so I've removed one. In the event of copyright questions, all issues are to be resolved before the image is re-added, as noted in the blocking policy.
brenneman{T}{L} 12:33, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not going to lie to you about this, but I am very angry at the moment about the recent events at Lolicon, and I've never been particularly fond of copyright law in general either. I believe I have just made my first point so I can now move on to the second. I did not post the second picture (the one that was just removed) on this article, so I have no "attachment" to it like I do the first (poorly phrased, I know), but even so I do not in fact believe that the second contributed much to the subject that wasn't already by the first picture... hence the reason I chose it in the first place. But I do not wish to see the mods and admins extend their Jesusland ethic to this article like they did with Lolicon. Sweetfreek 01:19, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Whatever happened at Lolicon that annoyed you, there is still no need for the fair use image in this article. The subject of the article could reasonably be portrayed by a free image, and so any fair use image to show the subject generally is NOT needed. There is no dispute that it does not fit our fair use criteria for comics, as our tag states that the image is being used...


When, in fact, we are using it to illustrate the art form, and don't even mention the issue, the series or the characters in question. As such, I am removing it from the article. J Milburn 22:22, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
This is not about marketing or advertising a comic book title, nor is this a discussion on the stories or characters therein, this is about illustrating a topic, therefore, such irrelavent specifics have no righful place in your argument. The rule you have cited is of little merit when the real issue is over the "no free equivalent" rule (the 1st of the ten criteria for fair use)--all other relavent characteristics having already passed muster. Short of substituting the image with any of the amateurish stick-figure pencilings by the fans (thus defeating the purpose) or manufacturing a "suitable example" (effectively ending my status as an observer), I fail to see how any other image wouldn't incite your displeasure just as this one has. Sweetfreek 01:24, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Look at lolicon. They have a free image there, and these two art forms look to be pretty much the same to me- and, though I am not going to pretend to be an expert, the picture doesn't look bad. Even if this comic book cover is within our guidelines, which I am almost certain it is not, a free image would be very much preferable. J Milburn 22:00, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
The image used at Lolicon is precisely the sort of trash I was angered by because it was nothing more than the doodling of some 4chan-er that was passed off as "acceptable" by the moralistic and cavelier mods who jammed their noses into something that they clearly took little or no effort to properly research... and yet that was considered preferable to a pre-existing and "real-world" specimen. Find us an acceptable substitute, and I mean a piece that actually do the job of illustrating the topic in a proper way, and I'll consider the options... that much I promise here and now, but I am not in the mood for the cheap tactics of either /b/-tards or the morally-outraged wikipedians who want to use them as their personal army. Sweetfreek 22:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Shotokan

I added a link to this, as someone might just misspell it. --DanielCD 17:59, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I removed the links. We need to gather community consensus on the use of the these links. Will discuss more later. If someone wants to add them back, please explain why? FloNight talk 19:01, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

We don't need to sit and discuss every single feature of every single page. If we have a page on Impressionism, I would find that links to collections of Impressionist pictures would be useful. On a page on Shotacon, links to collections of Shotacon pictures are useful.--Prosfilaes 19:26, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
And you deleted it again, and told me to discuss it on talk, even though you've never given a justification in edit comments or on the talk page.--Prosfilaes 19:32, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Removed external links again. Article content is decided by community consensus. Please do not put these links in article without broad community consensus. --FloNight talk 19:36, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
You haven't shown any community consensus to remove them. Wikipedia is built by volunteers trying to make articles better. Community consensus is only called upon when editors can't agree; it's a time-expensive heavy hammer. You haven't even tried to explain why you're taking your actions, which is the first step. --Prosfilaes 19:44, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
I think there could be legal problems with links like that. I also don't think we need to help them advertise. --DanielCD 19:50, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
I agree. -Will Beback 21:34, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Can someone else remove them. I've done it twice. FloNight talk 21:39, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I removed them. If they are replaced, someone could be skirting the 3RR, so tred with care. --DanielCD 14:26, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
The material is obviously pornographic in nature. Just as with regular porn articles, providing links to the actual material is not the goal. An example will suffice, and there is a graphic one already provided. We aren't here to provide the material, we are here to provide an encyclopedic description of it and issues around it. Impressioistic paintings aren't controversial and don't have potential legal issues of this nature. --DanielCD 14:35, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


Perhaps an explaination of what these sites are might have a place, if they are part of this topic. --DanielCD 23:06, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Non-content specific external links

Shotacon is Japanese and anime term for a sexual complex where an adult is attracted to an underage boy. Shota typically refers to male characters under thirteen years of age. But in practice, this definition has expanded to include any young male characters who are considered child-like or cute.

The external links that I removed were not specific for the content of this article. They contain a variety of user uploaded sexually explicit images. Some are sexually explicit digital photo images of real people that are user uploaded. Many images are drawings or uploaded photos of females of all ages. These links seem to promote web sites that collect sexually explicit images. They add little value to the article and open up Wikipedia to the risk or promoting illegal images. FloNight talk 14:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Can you explain where or which of the websites had photos of real children? As far as I know, all of the websites you removed have a policy against images like that. If there were any there you may have seen an attack by someone trying to get the board shut down, before the mods cleaned it up. I don't know, I'm not going to risk clicking them all, but there shouldn't be any child porn there. If one of them is openly allowing child porn to be posted you might also want to submit it here. 24.224.153.40 03:00, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Well, there are laws out there about virtual and art/drawn porn as well. Plus, I'd be cautious about reporting anything to the FBI under any circumstances. --DanielCD 04:09, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
It's not illegal to link to pages which link to something which may or may not be illegal. Linking to these pages does not show any support for them, just as linking to an opinionated movie review would not be a violation of NPOV.
I don't like the FBI because they have a hobby of distributing real kiddie porn, but they usually act quickly enough whenever it is reported. But shotakon art shouldn't be reported, I must have misread FloNight's comment. 24.224.153.40 18:35, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Shochan - a Shotacon Community http://www.shochan.org/ - where are this site?

-- Shochan is a community for shotacon fanatics. It is more of a forum and a source for shotacon.

Whoever is keep removing links because of competition, I know who you are, please quit doing it.

the article gives a wrong picture

Shotacon is a complex, yes, but it doesnt have to be a sexual one! Heres the translation of the japanese entry: Shoutarou-complex (正太郎コンプレックス) describes the love or the 'being attracted to' young boys (shounen). Its also the word to describe a person who feels said love/attraction. Its a neologism and the shortcut 'shota' is often used.

the manga Loveless for example is clearly shotacon, but theres no sex implied or shown. same with +Anima. It shows relationships with boys, the manga is dedicated to boys, but sex is only a part of the genre. CuffedCatboy 19:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

You got a book with blood on it, hu? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 208.102.209.167 (talk) 13:33, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

The most images and references, what i got, have a sexual conotation. More than pure sexual, the bondage, slavery are presents too. The works of Poju and some others artists, wich i can't remember the names, are pure sexual material. If you looking for "SHOTA" in images of the google page you are found references of this. Some people say the manipulate charachters of naruto, dragon ball etc is just a Yaoi version of them, but the sexuality and the porn is still present. What I want to say is: Actually, the term Shotacom is relationed to Sexual desire or sexual relations between boys and adult men or even boys and boys.

Complete Lack of Objectivity

"Like lolicon, shotacon often depicts children in sexual situations with adults. While the shotacon community argues that drawn art is protected under freedom of speech, critics claim shotacon is a direct offshoot of child pornography and may lead to child sexual abuse, though there is no evidence or documented cases to back this claim." Where are the sources to this claim? Highly reliable studies have concluded that approximately a quarter of all adult males are attracted to children, and overhelming number of pedophiles are decent people. Only a small minority abuse children. The article is very one sided and feminist-conservative in nature. I think we should do serious liberal revisions of this page, because people who have this attraction should certainly not be ashamed of themselves - there is no reason for that, no matter what conservative minds might say. The extent to which pedophilia occurs is not known with any certainty. Some studies have concluded that at least a quarter of all adult men may have some feelings of sexual arousal in connection with children (Source: Freund, K. and Costell, R. (1970). "The structure of erotic preference in the nondeviant male." Behaviour Research & Therapy 8 (1), 15-20. Quinsey, V. L. et al. (1975). "Penile circumference, skin conductance, and ranking responses of child molesters and 'normals' to sexual and nonsexual visual stimuli." Behavior Therapy. 6, 213-219.) Bosniak 03:12, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Updating the article with a pro-paedophilia bias wouldn't improve the situation, even if anyone were to seriously consider doing so. Exploding Boy 03:16, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
It's much easier to say someone is biased for pedophilia than against it. - 71.84.195.131 (talk) 14:24, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, it seems to me that this community is better off with one sided pro-feminist child-protection stupidities. Children are sexual beings too and enjoy sexual feelings, at least I did when I was child, read here about child sexuality. When I was a child, I wished I could have sex with an adult; and when I was teen, I was exploding from need to be intimate with an adult woman. Why are people making a big deal out of taboos? Legal age of sexual consent, for example, in Canada is 14. Conservatist tried to increase it, but our Liberal government opposition stopped it. You can read more info about our legal age of sexual consent from our Ministry of Justice website here http://www.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/clp/faq.html . Enjoy. Bosniak 03:21, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

And yet, as you yourself say on your talk page (and I quote), "Whether you agree or disagree with the facts of the case - it's irrelevant. This is Wikipedia, and not your personal web page where you can throw anything you want." Exploding Boy 03:25, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh please, don't mix pedophilia with genocide, okay? And the facts of the case have not been even remotely objectively presented on this Shotacon article. And you wanted to surprise me with your argument where you compare pedophilia with Srebrenica genocide? Our discussion is over. Bosniak 05:36, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

I never even mentioned genocide. I'm simply pointing out that you can believe whatever you like, but you can't add whatever you like to Wikipedia articles. Exploding Boy 05:39, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Examples

In the " Non hentai anime woth shotacon themes" it says that Steel Angel Kurumi is an example of shotacon, but is there any source that says, Kurumi and karinka and full-grown women?--David13579 00:26, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... looking at the pages for Hentai and Lolicon, I find there to be no links to websites with gallerys, images, doujins or, really, sexual depictions of any extreme. What is the reasoning behind the linking to sites containing hentai shotacon? --24.222.241.186 14:50, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Conflict with lolicon

On this page it says: "critics claim shotacon is a direct offshoot of child pornography and may lead to child sexual abuse, backed by studies done on the subject by the NHC" However, on lolicon it says: "An argument is that obscene fictional images portray children as sex objects, thereby contributing to child sexual abuse. This argument has been disputed by the claim that there is no scientific basis for that connection, and that restricting sexual expression in drawings or animated games and videos might actually increase the rate of sexual crime by eliminating a harmless outlet for desires that could motivate crime" Now this NHC information could be completely inaccurate, and should be taken off the page before more people use it as a referance. On the flipside, it could be a well respected and undisputed study and should be put on both pages. However, also likely is that the evidence is non-conclusive or conflicting. This issue is not adressed, so those that read the lolicon argument may think there is an absense of scientific evidence that reading shotacon/lolicon increases child abuse. Similarly, people that read the shotacon article may think its scientific fact that such materials increase child abuse incidents. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.116.159.199 (talk) 08:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Shota Syouta Con

I have a lot of yaoi friends & we each have our fetishes & we teach eachother our aquired vocabularies. One of my friends has a Syouta preference. She says that MOST Japanese websites say Shota instead of Shotacom & that it's usually spelled in English with a y instead of an H. It's been 10 years & she's sticking with it. -Unsigned, Undated

I've personally never seen it spelled with a 'y'. You may want to look for a source for that to see if it is not simply an isolated eccentricity. Tyciol (talk) 02:05, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

NHC study?

"claim shōtacon is a direct offshoot of child pornography and may lead to child sexual abuse, backed by studies done on the subject by the NHC (formerly the National Children's Homes).[citation needed]"

Alright, we can't have unsourced statements staying around forever. Has anyone found this study from the NHC and found out if it is a reputable source that is being accurately interpreted? If not, I think the last part 'backed by...' should be removed, and simply leave the claims of critics as unfounded. It is improper to claim in the article that claims are backed without actually backing them. Tyciol (talk) 02:05, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Should the Audience section be removed?

The claim that most homosexual males enjoy shota? Where does that come from? It looks like a prejudiced assumption, really... Really, nothing in that section is backed up by anything. And it's been there forever, and has never had any citations. I say we remove it. 68.120.227.244 (talk) 19:13, 23 August 2008 (UTC)


Hi. Just a quick post to request consensus to remove an external link. I belong to Shochan and our servers have basically snuffed it. We are offline, off air and to all intent and purpose, dead; at least for the time being till one of us can speak to the Server Manager. :) Thor Malmjursson (talk) 16:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Removing original research and taggings

I've removed the section titled Non-hentai series with shotacon themes because it was becoming a laundry list full of original research. There really wasn't a specific purpose to the list other then as a form of trivia. It only takes a couple of examples to illustrate the subject instead of 13 and growing. I've also tagged the controversy section, which should be integrated into other parts of the article where sourced. I've tagged Shotacon publications, Shotacon anime, and Shotacon video games as unencyopedic because they skirts close to WP:NOTDIRECTORY. I also question the need to include any anime, manga, or video game outside contextual examples. --Farix (Talk) 06:20, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

All good work. Thanks. / edg ☺ ☭ 16:28, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Strucutre and other notes

It probably wouldn't be a bad idea to structure the article similar to Lolicon, but without the huge legal section. The original Japanese language article could be used as a structural reference and the sourceable information translated and included here. The original lead contained a lot of jargon, which should generally be avoided.—Preceding unsigned comment added by TheFarix (talk • contribs)

The legal section is really a WP:COATRACK for Virtual child pornography (or some related topic). It doesn't belong here. / edg ☺ ☭ 00:37, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Shota legality revisited

Regarding the legality of Shota in the United States, the first man convited under the "expanded" child porn law made me wonder about the legal status of shota and, if it is illegal, how we should work that into the article. Please examine this news item: TimesDispatch from the news item:

  • "A 53-year-old Richmond man yesterday became the first person convicted under a 2003 federal statute that makes obscene cartoon drawings as well as photographs an illegal form of child pornography."
  • "Whorley used a computer at a Virginia Employment Commission office in Richmond on March 30, 2004, to view obscene Japanese anime cartoons that depict female children being forced into sexual intercourse with adult males."

Granted this is more about lolicon but if one is illegal, surely the other is too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Psychedelicfrog (talk • contribs) 11:44, December 2, 2005

There is now a separate article for the legal statuses, added to bottom of SA sec. Tyciol (talk) 21:48, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Too specific!

I feel that the definition of Shota-kon given by this page is overly specific. Shota-kon has absolutely no sexual denotation or connotation. The term is a sweeping generalization of all people who are particlarly attracted to shota characters in ACG (Anime, Comic, Game). This does not have to be sexual, and therefore in no way pedophilic, as I feel that this page suggests. The shota-kon described here only describes the extreme form of shota-kon, in the forms found only in 18+ ACG genres. I would like to see the focus of this page be altered, since the term shota-kon is not given its full definition here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jojorocko (talk • contribs) 21:23, January 27, 2006

There are sexual aspects, but I think you are right in that it also covers non-sexual 'cute' aspects, since the term comes up in more romantic-oriented yaoi. Be bold and introduce explanations into the article about this if you feel strongly. Tyciol (talk) 21:48, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Gotoh

Redirected from Gotoh? Why? Gotoh is a maker of guitar hardware (bridges, tuners, etc). When I typed Gotoh in the search bar I got redirected here with no explanation. There doesn't seem to be any further mention of Gotoh in the article to explain why. User:thinkpad20 —Preceding undated comment added 04:32, 7 June 2009 (UTC).

Gotoh is a mangaka, (Alias Juan Gotoh, I think) that draws shotacon and other material. 惑乱 Wakuran (talk) 13:46, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Pic equality

Since lolicon has two pics I realized it'd only be fair this have a couple. Has nobody come foreward with some kind of freely distributed example of this? I'd think it'd be easier to find with how it crosses into yaoi territory. Perhaps nabbing clipping a picture of the first two characters in this picture: File:Host_Club_episode_3.PNG will do until we find a more specific example? First shota that comes to mind at the moment (even though he's one of those "older than he looks" examples, in a non-H romance-comedy series. Tyciol (talk) 02:15, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

I am actually planning to draw one for this article, however less provocative. Something that would just show the qualities of typical shota archetypes perhaps. Akira T. 04:52, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I agree. Would shonen-ai be also considered shota? If so, someone needs to add this. Why is it ok for little girls to be shown in an erotic nature on the lolicon page, but not on the shota page? If anything, I'd think it'd be reversed. Is it because there isn't that much shota around available to the English speaking internet? Please add some pictures for demonstrative and exemplary purposes. I was under the impression that wikipedia doesn't believe in censorship. ForestAngel (talk) 16:40, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

On the male-male seijin shotacon target audience

I just reverted an edit by an unknown user that stated that male-male shotacon "is consumed mostly by bisexual or pansexual males". Currently, there is no demographic information as to the actual readership of male-targeted shotacon that I know of (if anyone has cites I'd be very grateful if they would share them), but most male-male shotacon is marketed primarily to straight-(identified) men; a significant portion is published in otherwise-heterosexual porn magazines, and, judging from the ads and cross-promotional material they carry, most of the m/m-shota specialty magazines also target predominantly straight-identified men, not men who are attracted to other (adult, masculine) men. The (professionally published) works that explicitly marketed to gay and bisexual men, which were a minority, tended to be quite distinct in style and presentation and cary entirely different advertising (back when there were any; currently the gay-targeted shota magazines that I know of are defunct, and shota for gay men appears in general bara magazines, on the web and in doujinshi). (The doujinshi market is a mess, I won't generalize about that.) My opinion is that male-male seijin shotacon is, functionally, the intersection of lolicon and futanari; many of the consumers are quite vocal in their lack of interest in actual men (to put it mildly). Perhaps in the US, which does not have the same history of presenting cross-dressed or gender-ambiguous individuals as appropriate targets of straight-identified male desire, consumers of this sort of material are more likely to identify as something other than straight, but in terms of the Japanese audience the publishers seem to have quite firm expectations about their readership. - JRBrown (talk) 14:40, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Not liking adult men is irrelevant. If a man feels sexually aroused to MALE children, he cannot possibly be considered "heterosexual". It's like saying NAMBLA members are straight since they don't go after male adults. Also, characters in such works have male genitalia for a reason; otherwise they could be loli characters. Finally, male-male shotacon is NOT made for the "general male audience"; it is a niche. People who are exclusively attracted to physically-developed women (the majority) aren't likely to consume such material.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.172.78.84 (talk) 21:28, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Whether or not heterosexual men are the primary audience for shotacon cannot be assumed, and would need to be sourced in this article. To assume looking at shotacon means ipso facto non-hetersexuality is original research. That said, I don't see what line from the cited source Gay Erotic Art in Japan Vol. 1 supports that paragraph. Could we have a quote here? / edg ☺ ☭ 22:16, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Rarely entirely non-sexual?

I'd argue that, in the Western world at least, the 'non-sexual' aspect is more prominent. Particularly on sort of social media and such. Granted that's mostly anecdotal evidence, but I think it's worth some kind of change to that section. 50.100.48.26 (talk) 02:07, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Shotacon/Archive_1&oldid=1143732332"