User talk:UmJammer Lammy

Revision of My Edit

We'll talk more on some other congruent subjects, but for now, this is solely about my edit, and the need to do it right. On November 18 2021, you undid an edit I made about Chris's attraction to cartoon characters. Your reasoning was "Removing this both for being poorly-written and because Chris isn't exceptional in this regard." So, I went back and made an in depth edit with links to other pages on the site which serve as proof, and overhauled my prose to fit what I felt was the Cwcki's neutral wiki standard POV. I removed *Channer terms like "rule 34" and explanations thereof, believing that such things were what you and 4CentUser considered as "poorly written". So, no condemnations, not even a hint of condemnation. No opinions. No silly willy channer talk. Just notations of instances of Chris expressing sexual arousal to cartoons and anime, and it was perfectly in line with the other sub headers. It went down like this: 1. Homosexuality 2. Pedophilia 3.Bestiality and than 4. Schediaphilia. And yes, I research too, the scientific term for this kind of sexual attraction, according to Urban Dictionary is "Schediaphilia" from the Greek word for "Love of Drawings". So here, I felt that my edit meets the standards. But no, because then on November 25 2021, I see my edit removed again, with your reasoning being: "Chris isn't exceptional in this regard, it just reads like you have a personal agenda against things you don't like just because Howard Stern said so." So now, I really trying hard here, to meet the standards of this CWCki. What am I doing wrong? And if Chris being attracted to cartoons is not notable, then would that mean the "Is Chris a furry?" segment is not notable or "exceptional" either? TippyToesTommyTalarico (talk) 18:49, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Exceptionalism

On another note, just so that we're on the same level of understanding, what do you mean by "exceptional"? I browse Kiwi Farms a lot sometimes, and there, "exceptional" is the word filter word for "retarded". So when you say "Chris is not exceptional in that regard", do you mean he is not notable enough in that aspect? Or do you mean that this aspect does not make him stupid? TippyToesTommyTalarico (talk) 19:13, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Reply; Cartoon and Anime Porn 1, Relevancy to Chris

Chris finding cartoons to be arousing is actually quite relevant. He got "married" to his own creation Magi-chan and willingly believed the many obvious falsehoods of the Idea Guys; the central core of which being that a "sexy" cute anime girl named Hyper Dimensional Neptunia was going to enter his dimension, wave a magic wand and make all his problems disappear. My thesis here is that Chris Chan created a disconnect with real life in favor of a fantasy, and just like many of his weird behaviors can be contributed to his autism mixed with his upbringing, so too, can his disconnected grasp of reality be attributed to his being sexually aroused by cartoon women. True, Chris is indeed, far from the only person who masturbated to cartoons, and he is also far from the only person who threw tantrums on the internet, and he is also far from the only person to make a recolor of Sonic The Hedgehog and think Sega would scout him, and he is far from the only person to draw himself as a furry anime hero, and he is also far from the only person to not shower and not get a job and still wonder why girls don't like him. The thing is, is like those latter things, masturbating to cartoons is an embarrassing thing and the hallmark of a loser. A lolcow. And maybe it should be that way, because otherwise, we might be normalizing a bad thing and bringing all society down with that. Or, maybe not. Maybe I'm wrong about that and hentai has its place in the world like a lot of other things like I used to think when I was back in late high school/college. But still, I'd argue that attraction to cartoons should a noted, maybe just a few sentences next time if there's a next time. TippyToesTommyTalarico (talk) 17:30, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Reply; Cartoon and Anime Porn 2, The World's Opinion Thereof

I'm not saying that Chris getting aroused from pornographic/cheesecake/fetish anime and cartoon art is the worst thing he's done. It's not. What I'm saying is that it is a notable thing. Something to jot down. For instance, if we were to talk about Andrew Dobson, and we will, we would note that he drew fetish art of anime schoolgirls getting cartoonishly blown up like baloons and then cartoonishly popped. Why? Because one's sexual preferences, as I was told by my irl friends, shows a window into a person's soul. If the person is sexually interested things most normal people are sexually into, like breasts/pecs, buttocks and thighs, maybe genitalia, then there's nothing to write home about, that person is normal. But if the person say, is aroused by an illustrated pink haired girl in a sailor uniform, with a child like baby face, then that says a little more about a person, and may be indicative of something. Just like if a person like Chris is attracted to his cartoon representation of a girl wearing a sailor moon uniform, or a girl transformed into a cartoon hedgehog, it may be indicative that this person is sexually warped and with that, is packaged with a bunch of other problems. Again, you can prove me wrong, but tell me of some successful and most of all, moral decent human beings who have cartoon fetishes. Can you name any? See, there's no personal vendetta at all. No anger, just love, empathy, and the sense of doing what's right. Why would I be angry or jealous at your typical guy in his parent's basement, living off of mommy and daddy's money buying imported goods until the well runs dry? Who would want to be that? There's nothing to be envious about that. If anything, such people need society's help or society needs to mend its cracks so people don't end up like that. It is alsot not just Howard Stern that made me think differently about this subject. This common thing you see on the internet, that may be actually damaging if not viewed a certain way(that is, with a critical and educated lens i.e. litmus testing, "Haha, this is misanthropic and perverse, I can't believe fap to this, people who do have issues"). It was also Socraturtles, it was also BennetTheSage, it was a medium article, it was Steve Blum, it was Hayao freaking Miyazaki, it was Satoshi Kon, it was my irl friends, it's the world and my observations thereof. Not one different opinion made me think differently they all had a hand. Though here is a link to Mark Friggan's run down on the November 26 show of Howard Stern courtesy of Mark Friggan if you are curious. These are his words not mine: http://www.marksfriggin.com/news18/11-26.htm Just hit ctrl+f and type in "hentai" to see Stern and company's two cents on that. I don't know if this show is archived on sirius xm, but you can try. Like I said, Hayao Miyazaki, anime god, has condemned attraction to cartoons https://www.polygon.com/animation-cartoons/2020/5/25/21266704/hayao-miyazaki-anime-was-a-mistake-meme-explained Here's this quote:

   "You see, whether you can draw like this or not, being able to think up this kind of design, it depends on whether or not you can say to yourself, “Oh, yeah, girls like this exist in real life.” If you don’t spend time watching real people, you can’t do this, because you’ve never seen it.  Some people spend their lives interested only in themselves. Almost all Japanese animation is produced with hardly any basis taken from observing real people, you know. It’s produced by humans who can’t stand looking at other humans. And that’s why the industry is full of otaku!"--Hayao Miyazaki

So, from that quote, we correlate what Miyazaki said right there, to what I brought up about "disconnecting from reality" just like Chris Chan did, and like so many other "weebs" are doing, but not realizing. Miyazaki's quote especially relates to Chris because we can all agree that he is one of the people who are only interested in themselves, as evidenced by his heavy presence in his fictional work based on an idealized version of his real life. But Miyzaki isn't the the only anime master, to condemn masturbation to cartoons, despite the long list of previously desperate lesser anime authors who dabbled in hentai to break out. https://sotaku.com/29-famous-manga-and-anime-artists-that-have-done-ero-manga/ Enter Satoshi Kon, who you may know as the creator of such movies like Perfect Blue, Millennium Actress, Tokyo Godfathers, and Paprika. Satoshi Kon also did a tv series called "Paranoia Agent", in where a pop cartoonist claims to get attacked by a bat wielding maniac, setting forth a chain of events to drags her whole city into a wave of paranoia. I really recommend this one series to you, because not just is it superbly written with a great ongoing social commentary that breaks cultural barriers, but also because of this one c-plot involving an otaku. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cy90iySXAAEBJGv?format=jpg&name=medium An obsessive doll collecting otaku who seems to have a fetish for anime girls of many different types in many different articles of fetish clothing(sailor school unforms, nurse outfits, cheerleader outfits, qi paos, bunny girls, cat girls, the works). http://explodedgoat.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/PAE3_shot1.png Like all such cartoon masturbators he is a chubby schlubby nerd that can't get a date, so he resorts to hiring a prostitute. I won't spoil much but eventually, he toom disconnects from reality, and gets consumed by his hobbies and interests and nullified in a way because of that. The one positive thing though, is that his nullification did serve as a stepping stone for this super cool superhero to use as a means of getting to the bottom of the thing destroying the city. Here's an article on Satoshi Kon's two cents. https://the-artifice.com/satoshi-kon-otaku-anime/ --TippyToesTommyTalarico (talk) 13:24, 07 December 2021 (UTC)

Again, you can prove me wrong, but tell me of some successful and most of all, moral decent human beings who have cartoon fetishes. Can you name any?

Sorry, I can't read minds so I can't know if everyone who faps to cartoons is a good or bad person and frankly I don't care. This wiki also does not care if Howard Stern or Hayao Miyazaki condemn such behavior and you should just drop the subject as it goes beyond the site's scope. I'm quitting this conversation as it goes nowhere and I'm not interested in debating whether fapping to drawings is right or wrong, and if you re-add that to any article I'll remove it on sight, okay?. UmJammer Lammy (talk) 04:27, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Sally Acorn Dream

I know you wanted to stop talking about the subject of Chris's Schedephilia, and it's potential status as a genuine mental disorder, all together, and I respect that, as I'm going to try to continue the conversation with Psychonerd instead.

However, I do want you to check this out: https://sonichu.com/cwcki/The_Place_chats_(February_2021)#Sally_Acorn_Dream

Now you see? The Sailor Moon poster incident and the rule 34 Encyclopedia Dramatica uploads don't seem too irrelevant anymore do they? Just keep that in mind. -TippyToesTommyTalarico (talk) 12:11, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

I'd really appreciate it if you stopped with this, as these edit wars over such trivial things were precisely what got you banned from editing certain pages, and as far as I can tell, that's all you've done. The fact that you were trying to put in theories from the Manosphere on these pages is bad enough, but what are you even trying to accomplish by proving that Chris has "Schedephilia"? A lot of Internet weirdos fap to cartoons, and they typically don't end up fucking their moms, so it's not really something that makes Chris stand out, nor does it explain his sex life, or why he obsesses over his "Love Quest". I feel it's worth pointing out, this isn't a forum, so trying to push armchair psycholgist theories about Chris's Love Quest onto wiki pages like that isn't key.

I do feel that we could point out that Chris had fantasized over cartoon characters, though, as he totally has. Meg Griffin was a perfect example of this. It's just that we shouldn't treat it as anything super meaningful outside of Chris just being thirsty as fuck. Psycho (talk) 19:35, 18 May 2022 (UTC)