Yeah it it so bad

"we're trying to protect children"

*bans characters that look nothing like children*

*Allows users as young as 13 to register for the site*
*Allows characters as young as, funnily enough, also 13 to be used in "totally not a fetish" fetishes such as vore, tf, and pregnancy content*

I'll still be careful with Pikachu, because before the "clarification," they considered the Pokémon "child-like."

Well tbf Twitter was never the Ideal standard. In any case though I personally see the rule is to draconian given the site.

We need to be real here the reason they are doing this is because there so worried that Pokemon and Digimon can be used as a loophole to a fake age.

I could see if it was like they were drawn as a child but fiction is given alot more freedom of expression and pokemon and digimon on any other site such as this would be allowed.

But what really makes this change suck is the lack of list. They are willing to make full blown examples but something so large m8 I expect a full blown list of every pokemon you dont want on the site in that way otherwise your scaring people from making any art with pokemon and digimon in the NSFW sector.

Doesn't even make sense to have these rules apply to Pokémon or other fictional creatures etc. They're not real and not human, so what laws are being broken? None. They're made up creatures.

In the words of the Joker, "There's no laws against the Pokémon, Batman."

Anyway, I think they should just throw their new policy in the trash can, because that's where it belongs.

Thing is, in an episode of the Pokemon anime, there were a tribe of Treeko, and one of them was a super old elder.

Thus suggesting that age and evolution is not explicitly related in a Pokemon's life.

I'm all for banning child characters, but this policy change has only caused unease of people who have pokemon, shortstack, chibi, or smol characters.