As some of you may have already heard, Picarto updated their TOS to restrict loli and shota content.

https://embed.gyazo.com/6559a136406474af876b22ad352fb923.png

Me personally, I would understand if the decision came as a result of some country's authorities threatening legal action or something (which I still have something of an issue with, one countries laws shouldn't be enough for them to be able to police the world.), but it's the fact that they banned simply because some members complained about it that really grinds my gears.

People always come back with weak argument like "it encourages pedophilia", "it's immoral", etc. Or my personal favorite "it's wrong and I don't like it, so I want it gone."

My counter to these kinds of claims are simple, THEY'RE FUCKING DRAWINGS! A collection of pixels on a screen to form an image! The content of which has no clear and/or concrete reflections to any real world parallels. Do feral/anthro artists drawing smut mean they harbor desires for actual zoophilia? So gore/snuff artists draw what they do because they're closet sociopath's and murders? Do rape artists just want to go out and ravage everything that has an orifice? To be fair some might, but do we assume that? Of course not, cause they're just drawings, and when people have an issue with those, are there large movements to ban and restrict them? Of course not, people are expected to block it/don't watch, and move on.

So why exactly are the those same ideas suddenly null and void when it comes to underage art? Because of their real world parallels? News flash, murder, rape, etc are just as bad, yet in their art forms they get a simple brush, why not the same for underage then?

(Note that I'm aware that when it violates a countries laws, there's not much that can be done to fight it. Granted even in that regard it doesn't legitimately hold any grounds when using the argument above, but that's a different debate for a different thread. This "rant" is based around the fact that the content was banned for no other reason than some users displaying their dislike for it, and nothing more.)

ThatBIackGuy said:
My counter to these kinds of claims are simple, THEY'RE FUCKING DRAWINGS! A collection of pixels on a screen to form an image! The content of which has no clear and/or concrete reflections to any real world parallels. Do feral/anthro artists drawing smut mean they harbor desires for actual zoophilia? So gore/snuff artists draw what they do because they're closet sociopath's and murders? Do rape artists just want to go out and ravage everything that has an orifice? To be fair some might, but do we assume that? Of course not, cause they're just drawings, and when people have an issue with those, are there large movements to ban and restrict them? Of course not, people are expected to block it/don't watch, and move on.

exactly and i wonder (i rather doubt it will) if e621 may one day become plagued with this issue as well.

but if you really want to see that kind of stuff, i know Yaoi Haven Reborn has m/m shota and i'm fairly certain theres a similar site out there somewhere covering f/f loli and likely yet another with straight content.

ThatBIackGuy said:

People always come back with weak argument like "it encourages pedophilia", "it's immoral", etc. Or my personal favorite "it's wrong and I don't like it, so I want it gone."

But, but! I hate it and I want it gone!

No, on a serious note, I find this stupid as well. It is art. The only argument that holds any water is the idea that it "might encourage child molestation in one way or another", but another argument could be made just as easily that giving people with such interests a non-harmful outlet might help them resist any such temptations.

Interestingly, I was recently talking with a sexologist on the issue of pedophilia, and he was working on publishing some research that suggested that as much as a third of adult males may be more physically attracted to prepubescent girls than to adult women.

Though usually the sorts of people who would need a non-harmful "outlet" would be "exclusive pedophiles", so that really doesn't apply to my initial argument, but it is still fascinating, if true.

Do feral/anthro artists drawing smut mean they harbor desires for actual zoophilia?

At least as far as furries are concerned, there are significantly more zoophiles in the furry fandom than in the general population, though still the minority (according to the State of the Fandom surveys), unless there is a huge amount of under-reporting going on (which there probably is, but I wouldn't expect by that amount).

So you are right in a sense that this is not necessarily the case, but it is a pretty significant predictor. And that is taking a look at the fandom at a whole - the numbers are probably more significant if you restrict the domain from "furries in general" to "feral artists"?

I wonder also, to what extent does this hold true for the rest of the things you mentioned?

So why exactly are the those same ideas suddenly null and void when it comes to underage art? Because of their real world parallels? News flash, murder, rape, etc are just as bad, yet in their art forms they get a simple brush, why not the same for underage then?

Our society has a very strange attitude towards sex. Note, for example, that showing incredible violence on screen will get a movie rated R, but showing consensual sex will get an NC-17 rating. We are incredibly uncomfortable with sex, in general, and that goes doubly for anything involving minors, even when it doesn't involve adults. People get uncomfortable when you talk about masturbation. Even more so if you talk about toddler / infant masturbation (which, yes, is a thing). Child molestation adds an abusive element to the mix. So what you are seeing is the perfect storm made up of things people are generally uncomfortable with combined with things people find horrifically wrong. So that's why the moral crusade is waged so strongly against loli and shota art. It is not a rational thing, it is an emotional thing, with post-hoc justification.

Clawdragons said:
Interestingly, I was recently talking with a sexologist on the issue of pedophilia, and he was working on publishing some research that suggested that as much as a third of adult males may be more physically attracted to prepubescent girls than to adult women.

o.O

Clawdragons said:

I also object to you grouping zoophilia in with rape, child molestation, snuff, etc.. However, despite my need to object here, I also don't want to derail the topic too much, so... I don't know. Ignore me here.

I didn't group it in as to say they're all on the same level, but rather they're "extreme's" that are permitted in art, but otherwise wouldn't be in real life. (Cept zoophilia in some places, cause I know it's legal there.)

Are you sure the banning had nothing to do with their advertisers threatening to pull funding? That is typically what does it more then anything else.

This is why its unlikely so long as Varka owns E621 and as long as his magic dragon dildos sell well, its unlikely E621 will ever kowtoe to shit like that, since Varka just don't give a damn as long as it doesn't break any real world US law's.

RenaDyne said:
since Varka just don't give a damn as long as it doesn't break any real world US law's.

Arizona laws* :P

ThatBIackGuy said:
I didn't group it in as to say they're all on the same level, but rather they're "extreme's" that are permitted in art, but otherwise wouldn't be in real life. (Cept zoophilia in some places, cause I know it's legal there.)

Fair enough.

Hey, SJWs have their ways.

parasprite said:
Arizona laws* :P

Pffft Hahahaha X'D Makes so much sense