I know I am being a killjoy, but would this not be considered a tiny bit fucked up considering the angel has been kissing her in romantic way since she was a child in this work?
I know I am being a killjoy, but would this not be considered a tiny bit fucked up considering the angel has been kissing her in romantic way since she was a child in this work?
Maybe it's your mind that is 'tiny bit fucked up' for using real world logic against a piece of art, which is not happening in real live and adheres to their own world's version of what is normal and what is fucked up? Lips-to-lips kiss are hardy uncommonly done by kids, if their parents thought them to do so. Even in the first 'kiss' (which Coco initiates), they're already doing it, and in second one, it looks like Coco is the one asking for a kiss, where in the third one it's consensual (both party wants to kiss).
I know I am being a killjoy, but would this not be considered a tiny bit fucked up considering the angel has been kissing her in romantic way since she was a child in this work?
It could be, but not by logic. Pedophilia is harmful in non-consensual relations and sexual relations (at least, in most of them). But romance relations are not harmful for children and there are too little harm in kissing (angel's caries, anyone?). But many cultures consider kissing a sexual move (and some of them even consider kissing as taboo in general), and because of pedohysteria (the notion that pedophiles are EVERYWHERE and all they think about is how to RAPE YOUR CHILDREN), many activities with children have come to be seen as taboo in many countries. For example, part of the support for banning sex education in schools comes from the fear of pedophiles and child abuse. Or, for example, child nudity in the modern world is sometimes unnecessarily viewed by people as something sexual even when it's not. In these cases, rather than talking about how HARMFUL it is, people talking about how BAD it is.
p.s. And I'll be a little pedantic, but humans are not angels, nor dragons. What may be considered taboo in human society may be considered as something completely ordinary in another society, and vice versa. lolibaba and illegal matures are a death sentence for the modern concept of pedophilia.
It could be, but not by logic. Pedophilia is harmful in non-consensual relations and sexual relations (at least, in most of them). But romance relations are not harmful for children and there are too little harm in kissing (angel's caries, anyone?). But many cultures consider kissing a sexual move (and some of them even consider kissing as taboo in general), and because of pedohysteria (the notion that pedophiles are EVERYWHERE and all they think about is how to RAPE YOUR CHILDREN), many activities with children have come to be seen as taboo in many countries. For example, part of the support for banning sex education in schools comes from the fear of pedophiles and child abuse. Or, for example, child nudity in the modern world is sometimes unnecessarily viewed by people as something sexual even when it's not. In these cases, rather than talking about how HARMFUL it is, people talking about how BAD it is.
p.s. And I'll be a little pedantic, but humans are not angels, nor dragons. What may be considered taboo in human society may be considered as something completely ordinary in another society, and vice versa. lolibaba and illegal matures are a death sentence for the modern concept of pedophilia.
Pedophilia is harmful in non-consensual relations and sexual relations (at least, in most of them).
Gardares said: (at least, in most of them)
The fuck you mean "atleast in most of them"?
Any romantic/sexual relationship between and adult and child (and I'm not talking technically like a 17 year old and 18 year being together) is wrong because they are nowhere near equal in terms of mental/emotional development. It's the same reason you cannot fuck your dog. Kids who only get "romantically" groomed absolutely still suffer mental scars from it.
Edit: It's also the same reason that even though both are technically "children" a 17 year old having sex with a 12 year old would be harmful.
...because they are nowhere near equal in terms of mental/emotional development
Sorry, I am not an ageist and it is all up to young people to be developed enough or not. And yes, I am talking technically about 17 year old and 18 year old being together too. And I am not talking about grooming, because it isn't consensual relations or even romantic: grooming is a manipulation and deception of a partner. If relations are truthful, honest and careful then I don't see a reason to worry about any age gap.
P.s. So, if "your dog" is mentally developed enough it is ok to fuck it? For some reason I don't quite think that's the case here...
