Roronaa_chan said:
If you stare at a wall is it voyeurism? A table? A fork? Those things are more real than fictional characters. Can't voyeur what doesn't exist The American Psychiatric Association has classified certain voyeuristic fantasies, urges and behavior patterns as a paraphilia in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV) if the person has acted on these urges, or the sexual urges or fantasies cause marked distress or interpersonal difficulty.[6] It is described as a disorder of sexual preference in the ICD-10.[7] The DSM-IV defines voyeurism as the act of looking at "unsuspecting individuals, usually strangers, who are naked, in the process of disrobing, or engaging in sexual activity".[8] The diagnosis would not be given to people who experience typical sexual arousal simply by seeing nudity or sexual activity. In order to be diagnosed with voyeuristic disorder the symptoms must persist for over six months and the person in question must be over the age of 18.[9] |
"Can't voyeur what doesn't exist." The character does exist---as an observable, digital likeness of a human female. The definition you provided does not support your claim here, but it is clear that you're more interested in the discussion devolving into pissy semantic tirade.
Needless to say, that definition is not the only one out there and I stand by my original statement. Feel free to swap out 'voyeurism' for whatever term you think should apply---doesn't make it any less creepy.
