If you respect me you shouldn't make things up to prove a point. The character in the rp was 15, which was my partners choice and the absolute minimum I usually set, since I'm used to 15 being the age of consent. Even if this is still below your (and the sites) age of consent, I'd hardly call it lolita.

Further, there is nothing about my pictures that indicate underage girls except what you read into it. Most women in victorian era England married in their early to mid twenties.

FapFapFap:


In Victorian time the age for marrying varied though the years and marriage at 14, even if it would raise some brows, was not unheard of; http://www.angelpig.net/victorian/engagement.html. Now, as I said, I respect you as a member, I am not using lies to attack you, I am stating what you wrote in the first post of the story you made as a side story-RP for your pictures, in which you stated that the protagonist was 14 or 15 years old and through the RP you described a treatment similar to that you illustrated in your pictures, which, since you made the pictures, you wrote the starting post of that RP that I happened to stumble upon the other day, and had it going for a good while not minding the age you stated at first, doing everything you’ve illustrated from embarrassment to anal torture, I am sorry, but I feel inclined to believe that you did not mind the age in there.


Later on the first post was edited, the fact remains that you, who made those pictures, approved of a RP being made while imagining said treatment being given to underage girls. Now it is true that not ALL women in Victorian age married that young but you speak of a treatment to ensure they will get married, most probably before marriage age.


“Marriages were often arranged when the girls were only three of four years old. The law stated at the time that a girl as young as seven was capable of consenting to marriage. However, the marriage could not be consummated until the girl was 12 years old. In the 14th century courts were unwilling to convict rapists when the victim was pregnant. It was generally believed that her pregnancy signalled God's approval of the marriage.” http://www.historyofwomen.org/oppression.html


http://www.parliament.uk/about/livin...awofmarriage-/


Even now, the minimum age of marriage is 16, and, once more the pics could be seen as a board school for girls that were to be married and that could be left for an “indefinite” time, not girls just about to marry.









Leonid:

Well, what I wanted to be seen there was what Ellen already stated; it can become creepy when both sides; the one that wants to do remembrance of when they were kids or want to do age play and the ones that want to play to “damage” the children in any possible way, overlap. I’ve found members willing to do anal torture and even vaginal torture to underage characters, I’ve found members claiming to be underage and others who have stated how much they want to “spank to abuse” one (often underage) character and “want to feel it’s justified”. Now, if all that is perfectly in balance then I won’t bring up another issue.

The reporting system is in place precisely to weed out the elements you describe from those who simply have a different kind of fantasy. If you have truly found such thingsvand can produce proof of your accusation (which I have no reason either to believe or doubt, as I don´t know you), it is not with us you should be speaking, but with the administrators. As I said before, pointing your finger at members- even indirectly- to make a point doesn´t exactly gain you credibility.

The sites rules, I'm sorry to say, trump your personal preferences.
Nor are they a minor sop to be dealt with through ignoring it.

Also - can everyone please stop using words like underage or consent?

I've already told you all, as well as posting the site rules, that neither apply. The gallery rules are based around drawing styles which place characters between 14 and 17. The roleplay is 18 for sex and sexuality: which is not the common age of consent for anywhere important nor was part of the reasoning.

The rules are not built around the age of consent.

With respect, both of these things are against site rules and both of the real events on this site you are referencing were dealt with.

The RP which we know you to be alluding was moderated and the participants given a clear warning and a deadline to change their behavior.
I'd note that as per my previous post in this topic about cynical 'in name only' changes to the OP post without obeying the spirit of the rules on this site as well as the letter that if they continue they'll find new, stricter warnings given followed if necesary by action.

I'm only aware of one member that claimed to be underage, this too was rapidly dealt with - as best can be done on the internet - and resolved. I was under the impression that at least one mod sent you a thank-you for letting us know about it with the report function.

There's only so much we can do to prevent people from breaking rules, by-and-large moderation is only possible afterwards. The rules state no sex with child aged characters. The rules state that you must be 18 or over to have an account here.
There's no loophole being exploited here, there's no new rules that can be written to ban something already banned.

.

To that end - and I dislike making very negative posts at a person who is only trying to be helpful, as I believe you are - I would like to note that you are heavily trying to push the idea of commonality with extreme cases.

This smacks of Cherry Picking.

If there were dozens of hardcore sex RPs with infant characters or scores of images of nudity involving children in the galleries I'd take your point - but there really aren't.

This even manifests in your sauces: A feminist site and... I'm not sure what the other is but I suspect they were chosen simply for agreeing with you, rather than their credibility.
You even reference an event - that may not have happened - over 600 years ago as proof of concept. This is the worst kind of anecdotal dismissal.

On a personal note, I haven't spent a lot of time engaged in study of the victorians outside of london but I do wonder if the whole discussion is not rather pointless since you're dealing with a part of time when law and legality was highly fluid and largely flaunted anyway. Common-law meant judges were otherwise unrestricted in making it up as they went along and largely spent their time as adjudicationary between two private parties.
The idea of Age of Consent was a civil torte to allow the suing for damages of agrieved parties (usually fathers) and resolutions that followed - especially your 14th century example - would be civil court adjucation.
The application of any element that it was unlawful, immoral or prosecutable by the Crown came much later and the 'appeal to authority' of bringing statues in doesn't apply to either side in the debate I feel.

Because we all know the historical accuracy of entire schools filled with dildo-chairs, closets full of girls with their just asses sticking out, and bondage beds, right? His pictures are practically a historical reference guide!

Leonid: As said, if all that is in perfect balance I won’t put any other objection, I was solely pointing out how it would have to prevent certain doings such as the comments being about if the character if under age or putting creepy stories about children being spanked while naked and “exposed”. Hell I’m not asking people to stop doing anything, just pointing out something that would be convenient to the artists as well.

RobM: I understand how that works, maybe the sites were not the best to put here but I had heard from history teachers that it was done so I tried to search for it, I apologize for that, won’t do it again.
Now I’m not accusing FapFapFap of being anything, he said that he always put the warning in his pics and I was pointing out that the RPs that I’ve seen based in his pics did not contain characters of age (18 years old), that was solved, I know, just pointing it out not to annoy fapfapfap, just to put the why I was even talking about this; characters from pics that can be used later on as reference in RPs, stories, comments, etc.

Konpeito: What?
If you’re basing yourself on history to do a school of anal abuse and say it’s totally based on Victorian times … well, I can point out that it can be misleading and misused.



And with that the case is closed, we have perfect balance, so guess that the case is closed. It came as a god idea to avoid a bunch of trouble and sexualization of pictures that are not meant to be sexualized, but if that's not the case then I retire my proposition.