thems some vague ass rules
2 years ago
It seems to be refering to the pure anatomical visual of a character without going into enough depth as what counts as childlike.
It would be cool to have better prevention of pedophilia, but this feels like false action thats just causing confusion.
Also it feels like they have a problem with pokemon and digimon content in general thats not clear. If there's a direct issue with one of the largest parts of the furry fandom, there should be something more substantially said about it.
It would be cool to have better prevention of pedophilia, but this feels like false action thats just causing confusion.
Also it feels like they have a problem with pokemon and digimon content in general thats not clear. If there's a direct issue with one of the largest parts of the furry fandom, there should be something more substantially said about it.
That's why people in the furry fandom really need to STOP with the accusation foolishness and stop actually harassing children to "protect their galleries". THAT is the only reason we have a reputation for pedophilia problems. Cause these accusers keep actively bringing children to their pages just to bully them away from furry communities entirely.
This was not nearly an issue years ago. I think it has a lot to do with the 'Groomer accusations" against the LGBTQ+ communities and the fact that many prominent furs are part of that, so it kind of is a self defense mechanism that goes hand in hand. It's just grown ups acting like kindergarteners.....
Hehe and honestly, I'm not keeping a mental list of everyone who has interacted with underage people cause frankly, EVERYONE on this site and twitter has. Like I said, my question is why are these "Adult only" sections having such a strong problem with interacting with minors if this is meant to be for adults only? I think most people on this site are closet pedophiles cause they never shut up about it almost as if again...they WANT people to be pedophiles. That's kind of worse...