Far be it from the usually prescient people who bring us the uberly-hilarious and insightful online zine Cracked.com to risk bucking such a popular trend by attempting to be any more open-minded or informed about this hot button topic than anyone else. Which brings us to this article by Connor Thorpe describing the "5 Greatest Books With Psychotic Fan Bases," a list that includes (at number one, no less!) the classic novel Lolita. Take a wild guess who Nabakov's classic tome has as a "psychotic" fan base? I'll give you a small hint if you can't figure it out on your own--it isn't Trekkies, in case that was your first guess.

As you can see from reading the article, author Thorpe's problem isn't so much the "pedophiles" in America, who are rightfully ostracized and denied even the meager right to look at computer generated images of fully clothed minors if there is any possibility they might become aroused by viewing the fictitious simulation of a girl, but rather the the "pedophiles" of Japan, since they actually have legalized lolicon! Okay, though Lolita was actually about a hebephile, not a pedophile, and the largest amount of lolicon features young teen girls rather than little girls, why squabble over a simple term when the one being used invokes the strongest mental reaction in people than another more accurate term that would pack far less of an emotional punch in the gut, right? I mean, since accuracy is rarely the forte of any article that purports to discuss pedophilia and/or hebephilia, why expect any one single detail to be accurate, no matter how obvious the detail (i.e., the obvious physical differences between children and adolescents), right?

Let's look at some of the highlights of the section of Thorpe's article that presents such a humorous (read: laughable) condemnation of Lolita's contemptable fan base of evil "pedophiles" and my response to each of them:

Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita is the story of the unfortunately named Humbert Humbert, a middle-aged professor who's also basically a deranged pedophile. Humbert kidnaps a young girl, Lolita, and travels the country with her, until she runs off with another middle-aged man.

Um, Humbert is deranged?! Granted, he isn't depicted as a saint in the book, and he certainly isn't a role model for any hebephile (or actual pedophile) to follow, of course, but he's hardly Hannibal Lector or Michael Myers--then again, the latter two characters merely brutally murdered numerous people in hideously grotesque ways, and the unfortunately named Humbert has a romantic/physical preference for young adolescent girls--I would hate to further besmirch the character of Lector or Myers by comparing them to the likes of Humbert!

And Humbert kidnapped Lolita? From what I remember, he simply took legal custody of her when his wife Charlotte, who was Lolita's mom, died and Lolita didn't resist going with him in any way because she shared the attraction to Humbert. Of course, I wouldn't expect Thorpe to mention an insignificant little detail like that because it might make Humbert look ever so slightly less vile, and I can understand him not wanting to take that chance. So it's better to use the word "kidnapping," because every ignorant, er, smart person knows that under no conceivable circumstance would any girl on the planet, regardless of her personal preferences or individual level of experience, willingly go anywhere with a filthy "pedophile" like Humbert.

The term [lolicon] specifically refers to animated pornography that depicts children in an erotic context. Even more disturbing? The volume: Almost half of the animated porn released in Japan every year (which is like, all of it. They seriously love to hump cartoons in the Land of the Rising Sun) fits comfortably into the lolicon genre.

Hmmm, yea, the depiction of underage girls in an erotic context, and acknowledging their physical attraction in any way, shape, or form, is indeed disturbing. Much more so, in fact, than any depiction of extraordinarily graphic violence and torture that routinely appears in Japanese film like their infamous "Guinea Pig" movie series or their "pink" films (and no, I am NOT suggesting here that the uber-violent films should be banned simply because they upset the sensibiities of many people any more than lolicon should). When it comes to the erotic admiration of girls' (or boys') youthful beauty, that is waaaayyy over the line of decency that no enlightened society should ever tolerate. Bring on the violence and butchery any day!

And author Thorpe points out that the large prevelance of lolicon production in Japan is "even more disturbing" than the idea of admiring younger people "in that way." Hmmmm, could this possibly mean that such an attraction is common? Could this mean that hebephilia (and maybe even true pedophilia) is not as rare as englightened Americans like Thorpe would like to believe? Could it mean that adult attraction to younger people might be as "normal" as adult attraction to members of the same gender despite its social unpopularity in the West? Are such a vast amount of adults in Japan truly so disproportionately depraved compared to us open-minded and enlightened folks in the West, or can it simply be that the huge amount of legal, cultural, and social oppression of minor attracted adults in America and its fellow Western nations causes the bulk of pedophiles and hebephiles native to the West to stay far inside the closet? I'm sure the thought that hebephilia and pedophilia could be as common in America as they are in Japan is just too unsettling a thought for Mr. Thorpe to consider! It's much better to follow the party line of the American media than it is to do your own thinking or research on this subject.

Here is the kicker from this section of Thorpe's article:

Though the studies aren't exactly concrete, many do suggest that the prevalence of lolicon in Japan has reportedly led to significantly increased sex crime rates against children and teens.

Um, Mr. Thorpe needs to get his facts straight, if that isn't too much to ask of someone when they are doing something as innocuous and socially acceptable as bashing pedophiles and hebephiles.

One need look to the Research section of Newgon on Child Pornography to find cited quotations from numerous studies, most of which were not conducted by minor attracted adults, and one of which even dealt directly with the prevelance of sex crimes against minors in Japan, that make it quite clear that contrary to Thorpe's statement there is no convincing confirmation whatsoever that viewing erotic material featuring minors is any more likely to increase an adult's chances of committing a sex crime against a child or teen than viewing adult pornography is likely to cause an adult man to sexually assault a woman. I will directly quote the report specifically dealing with sex crimes against minors in Japan, since the Japanese acceptance of adult attraction to young adolescents was the prime "offender" in Thorpe's article:

"Diamond, Milton, and Uchiyama, Ayako (1999). 'Pornography, rape, and sex crimes in Japan', International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 22, 1-22.
"However, there are no specific child pornography laws in Japan and SEM depicting minors are readily available and widely consumed. [...] The most dramatic decrease in sex crimes was seen when attention was focused on the number and age of rapists and victims among younger groups (Table 2). We hypothesized that the increase in pornography [in general], without age restriction and in comics, if it had any detrimental effect, would most negatively influence younger individuals. Just the opposite occurred. The number of juvenile offenders dramatically dropped every period reviewed from 1,803 perpetrators in 1972 to a low of 264 in 1995; a drop of some 85% (Table 1). The number of victims also decreased particularly among the females younger than 13 (Table 2). In 1972, 8.3% of the victims were younger than 13. In 1995 the percentage of victims younger than 13 years of age dropped to 4.0%."

Note to Mr. Thorpe: I understand that bashing pedophilia and hebephilia and denouncing these poorly understood and poorly researched attraction bases is the "in" thing for almost everyone to do these days, and I also understand how important it is for Americans and other Westerners to pass judgement on cultural differences in nations that exist outside of the West that our own customs do not personally agree with, along with confusing our personal tastes with laws of nature, but please at least show us the courtesy to do your research effectively and provide citations to back up such claims, even if such claims are widely accepted and most of your readers do not care if you say inaccurate things about a certain social phenomenon as long as the targeted group is unpopular enough. Cracked.com is an awesome site, and it would be even more so if you guys showed equal care for accuracy regardless of what topic you are covering. Further, the site would be a truly refreshing face in a sea of mindless and ignorant condemnation if you actually made fun of the hysteria itself rather than mindlessly joining in on it.

The message of Lolita is hardly "pedophiles are awesome!"

I don't think any minor attracted adult, pedophile or hebephile, has ever interpreted that as the message behind Nabokov's book. We simply perceive it as a character study of a hebephile, and Humbert is hardly considered a role model for hebephiles and pedophiles to follow, but he was depicted as a complex character who wasn't unequivacably evil but had issues that were largely related to the way his attraction base was treated by society.

In fact, it's pretty much the exact fucking opposite. Remember how everybody dies and all? We don't know how the translation was handled, but we're pretty sure the Japanese version didn't end with all the characters laughing and leaping into the air for an '80s sitcom style freeze-frame.

I guess the Japanese do an injustice to what happened at the end of Nabokov's novel every time they do a story involving a hebephiliac relationship that doesn't end in horrible tragedy for all concerned, right Mr. Thorpe? Oh, and by the way, not every story touching on this theme in Japanese manga or cinema is patterned after Nabokov's book. The tradition of society-wide admiration for the beauty of young girls in the Land of the Rising Sun goes back long before Nabokov's novel saw the light of publication. The Japanese have never needed Nabokov's "encouragement" to feel that it's not the epitome of vileness or evil to admire the erotic aspects of young girl beauty.

Most of the interpretations of Nabokov's famous novel point to Humbert being a gigantic collection of dick-shaped blobs--a completely and utterly reprehensible human being that should by no means be emulated. Nabokov himself even hated the character, as evidenced by the fact that he wrote him as a goddamn pedophile [emphasis in original].

First of all, where does Mr. Thorpe get the impression that any hebephiles anywhere in the world are trying to emulate Humbert when they openly express their admiration for young girl attractiveness? I have yet to meet a fellow minor attracted person who finds Humbert worthy of emulation. And newsflash, Mr. Thorpe: the great majority of hebephiles (and pedophiles) are decent people who do not act like Humbert or Quilty in our personal dealings with people simply because we have an unpopular attraction base that disgusts you and much of the rest of "polite society." We are as multi-faceted and diverse in character traits and range of interests as any human being with a socially acceptable attraction base.

As for your contention that Nabokov "obviously" hated Humbert simply because he wrote him as a "pedophile," well that is certainly on target since no individual or character so obviously deserves condemnation and hatred more than a pedophile or hebephile, and there is no way in hell that anyone can possibly like a minor attracted person since it's quite "obvious" that all of us are psychos and monsters who cannot possibly have a single positive quality to our character considering our icky attraction base. And also by the way, Mr. Thorpe, are you aware that sexual crimes against children and teens are extremely rare outside of the home and other institutions (such as boarding schools) where adults have the greatest degree of power and control over minors, and that most real sex offenders do not have a preferential attraction towards minors? If real pedophiles and hebephiles were as universally evil and depraved as you seem to think, crimes against children and teens by adults who did not live in the same home with them would be astronomical in number rather than the rare crime it actually is.

Should I have expected better from one of Cracked.com's authors when tackling this issue? I suppose not, because some trends are just too popular to risk going against with a modicum of open-mindedness and attempts at accurate research. I certainly hope one of Mr. Thorpe's family or close friends, especially not one of his children, turns out to be a pedophile or a hebephile.