If I could get to vote, I would say "cut" because:
1. It glorifies —to the point of it being a borderline fetish— the "childish beauty and great innocence" of the so called "lolis".
That phrase and its variations keep popping up and up and each time it sounds less and less like a deliberately humorous line.
2. The fact that said glorifying comes mainly from the main character, a twenty-five year old man.
3. The insistence that the "lolicon" (explicitly described in the story as attraction to an underage girl) in the story is innocent and distinctly separate from the mental illness.
4. Dialogues like...
"LINDA: Mike... yo quería salir de aquí contigo... y vivir como una niña normal, junto a ti..."
("LINDA: Mike... I wanted to get out of here [she means the world they were both in] with you... and to live like a normal child [this is one of those instances where "niña" translates more into "child" because of the context], by your side...")
...Keep reaffirming this notion that a relationship between the main character (25 years old) and the girl (a frustratingly undefined age, but more and more she sounds like a minor) is something desirable.
5. The overly defensive "it's just like Kodomo No Jikan!" disclaimer at the start of the article, before even beginning to describe the work.
I wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt too, but:
"¿Lolicon, eh? Eso quiere decir: 'el complejo mental por el que un adulto se siente atraído hacia una niña de corta edad, a pesar de o incluso por su escaso desarrollo físico'. Puede llegar a tener un carácter... patológico."
("Lolicon, eh? That means: 'the mental complex by which an adult feels attracted to a girl of young age, despite or even because of her scarce physical development'. It can even have a... pathological aspect/nature to it.")
Tells me that the author knew full well what he was talking about. He clearly did research on what "lolicon" means.
edited 5th May '12 11:44:38 PM by Mazz