Basically as title, I wanted to hear if posts such as below are acceptable, since as it stands, it doesn’t break any of Lemmygrads rules. Frankly, the post is very weird to me, and the comments are bizarre. People talking about how they want to “dominated” by a 14 year old is imo not okay, especially not when it’s on a post of a drawing of a child with clear undertones. Maybe I’m misunderstanding the post since I’m not an evangelion fan, but I thought it was noteworthy enough to bring up here.

https://lemmygrad.ml/post/5810839

EDIT: The post has been removed, so I guess that’s a no?

    • darkcalling@lemmygrad.ml
      6·
      1 month ago

      She’s 14. All the Eva pilots are 14.

      Probably a bit beyond whatever the definition means perhaps given in the Russian novel it sources the term from she was I think 12 or something? I’m doubtful the referenced picture was “loli” as the OP asked in an incendiary manner though I do think it’s not the most appropriate and best not to be posted here if it even should be posted anywhere with some of the comments.

      • Haas [he/him]@lemmygrad.mlOP
        3·
        1 month ago

        I wasn’t being incendiary, my understanding of the term includes fawning or pining over underage anime girls, even if the images are SFW.

        • darkcalling@lemmygrad.ml
          3·
          1 month ago

          Loli refers specifically to a genre of images of sexualized pre-pubescent and tween aged drawn characters in the Japanese style. Asuka as drawn doesn’t really fit the trope and is honestly too old to fit the bill that way either.

          I have seen the deranged like channers and other pedophile or creep adjacent types refer to underage girls in general that way but it’s a term of objectification like “ho” or “thot” when used that way (yes even when directed at fictional characters). So I’m assuming through osmosis you were exposed to that. But best not to use it that way as it comes off wrong and icky. (And let’s be honest it’s already an awful term)