Talk:Knight of Lolicon

While there is nothing in this page which is explicit, the core conceit behind the fic it describes (which judging from what's written here seems to be about justifying some manner of pedophilia and drawing an artificial distinction between it and child abuse) disturbs me. And turning Dolores Haze into an apotheosized goddess of lolis and Humbert Humbert into some kind of martyred hero in the backstory is just ... <shudders>

My inner copyeditor wouldn't let me go past it without fixing all the mechanical issues that the page had, but now that that's done... do we really want this? I don't want to be all "Fast Eddie/P5" here, but it frankly creeps me out.

EDIT: Amazingly, not only did this page come over from TVT in the fork, it's still there. Somehow it has been overlooked by their Moral Guardians for over a decade.

@Labster @Looney Toons @GethN7 @Robkelk @QuestionableSanity @Derivative @SelfCloak

Keep in mind IRL actual content of this nature appalls me, so just getting any COI out of the way here.

That said, it's unnerving concept aside, the overall conceit is to argue "lolicon should mean not being a creep to little girls", albeit doublemasked through bizarre retcon of Vladimir Nabokov's original work. Conversely, it comes off as a borderline Troll Fic in trying to argue a clean message while teasing the more vile interpretation at the same time, to the point I really wonder if the former message is actually serious or the author being a two-faced degenerate.

In short, I'd argue for a stay, we've kept far worse, but the mixed message does make me wonder if it's not an incredibly clever Troll Fic.

You're not the only one appalled, believe me.

You may be right that it's a troll fic. I would object based on its size, but I've heard of other troll fics that grew to outrageous lengths, so I can't dismiss it on those grounds. And the page itself isn't a troll/bogus works page -- I followed the ff.net link to get its release date information and confirmed that something with that title exists on the other end.

As for letting it stay, I suppose I must agree with you. I need to remember and be consistent with what I said to Maximum Snowflake eight months ago:

Once you put limits (above and beyond those required by law) on what is acceptable speech, then it is no longer free speech -- it becomes "speech of which I approve -- and only speech of which I approve".

Regardless of its subject, there is nothing inherently illegal in the contents of this page. Thus there is no grounds for deleting it.

Regardless of its subject, there is nothing inherently illegal in the contents of this page. Thus there is no grounds for deleting it.

Then it stays.