As I like to put it: Why do those horrible people abuse fictional characters by drawing evil lines and colored shapes on the internet, instead of just finding a healthy outlet like kidnapping abusing and killing real children in a safe place like that "real life" nobody cares about? Find a human trafficking ring or something, just leave those anime characters and magical unicorns alone you freak!

Obviously joking... there exist those who literally can't tell the obvious, can't even know how to laugh at something today. Only real thing there is this actually is the sentiment and level of lucidity I'm seeing from some people out there.

To be fair though, part of the problem is the internet itself. When all you're doing is reading text without any tone of voice, nor having any idea as to the kind of person communicating a message, it can be hard to tell whether or not somebody is joking when they say anything. Problem is that winds up resulting in people taking everything seriously, rather than stepping back and asking themselves whether or not something might be a joke.

As for my statement in this journal, it's mostly a case of choosing the lesser of two evils. Granted there are people to whom it wouldn't be applicable, since they would either apply their interests to reality regardless, or actually would resume doing their hardest to keep it restricted to fantasy, I do believe that there are also people who, while they keep it to fantasy, may resort to otherwise if fantasy isn't an option. So why not give them that option to ensure that doesn't happen?

While I’m all for the removal of obvious children in kink scenarios, this policy update seems to not help. Like, using proportions to determine whether something is acceptable, disregarding art style and canon. Say someone has a cutesy character, of age, and explicitly said to be an adult in-universe, and they say it breaks the rules, then that’s simply ignoring context. Also, actual adults exist with some baby-like proportions. They could be simply short, or even people with dwarfism.

Also, they used Pokémon and Digimon for examples of species that need to be altered, I’m simply reminded of the anime having an old man Treecko for one episode. Same exact proportions as a ”younger” one.

The core problem with their so-called solution is that it has nothing to do with character age. As I've said at least one other time in another journal, what they're doing is a crusade against art styles and specific characters, not a crusade against child pornography. They're just disguising it as the latter, and there's nothing they or anybody else could tell me to convince me otherwise. Because that's the only logical explanation to their asinine method. Meanwhile, they'd just as well be allowing, and therefore condoning underage content so long as it can be drawn in a way to trick people into believing otherwise. FA is basically saying, "You can have two 10-year-olds fucking, just so long as they don't look 10."

I agree.

I agree with this 100%.

absolutely this

I can understand the logic, as it is the same logic used when people defend violent video games, but I never really am sure if it helps or hurts in the long run. Like for videogames; it may help those who were aggressive, but it also desensitizes so many others, as brutal violence is such a normal concept. Same can be said for this theory where it may both give them the fix that makes them not seek out an alternative in the real world, but could both make them reliant on the fix and more extreme, or gives a gateway for more people’s minds to fall into the world’s most taboo subject. (I understand the mind does what it wants and not everyone can control what it likes)

But in this case, I can understand that as a business, FA is probably under a sort of pressure to crack down on this regardless of if or if not it is less harmful in the long run.

On a bright side though, vore at least has been given FA’s good graces of not being an innately-sexual subject, so long as nothing otherwise NSFW occurs.

Indeed, it really does come down to the individual more than anything else. I'm just presenting the situation with the mentality of choosing the lesser of two evils. Especially since those people who are on the more extreme end of the spectrum could be that much more likely to lash out in illegal ways if they suddenly have what's keeping them stable taken away.