>>1740980>>1740996 And this is why you shouldn't post about controversial topics unless you understand the terminology...
From Wikipedia's article regarding "Lolicon"
>Outside Japan, lolicon is in less common usage and usually refers to the genre. The term is a reference to Vladimir Nabokov's book Lolita, in which a middle-aged man becomes sexually obsessed with a twelve-year-old girl.Nabakov's "Lolita" was published in 1955, in an era where practically no 12-year-old girls would have been going through puberty. Lolita = Prepubescent. The sexual dysfunction disabling successful performance unless copulating with a prepubescent mate is known as "Paedophilia" in the DSM-IV and onwards. Or as we call them, "Pedos".
A High-schooler is of a completely different calibre, however. HS'ers have not only begun the pubescent stage of adolescence, in many cases they are actually nearing the end of it, arguably making them post-pubescent, depending on the case-at-hand. At best, you have a case for Ephebosexualism, which is the sexualization of a mid-pubescent mate. The DSM-IV defines Ephebophilia as an exclusive sexual preference for mid-to-late adolescents aged 15-to-19.
In the end, even assuming we use your "High Schooler" example, where the girl has not technically finished the pubescent stage, she is not, scientifically speaking, a Loli. At best you have a case for Ephebosexualism instead of Paedosexualism, and as we've already established, in their nation of origin, 13 is the age of consent, thus making the moral question of fapping to a piece of art (Assuming there was any question to begin with. Art cannot be victimized, except arguably by "Modern" artists. Art has no rights.) a moot point.
