I've cropped out, in no particular order what I consider to be the most pertinent pieces of this thread so far.
Leaving out all the law stuff, which I recomend everyone else does too. I'm not a lawyer, nobody here is a lawyer (and if there were legally trained individuals who are members they're smart enough not to say anything for liability reasons) and law is an extremely complicated area. I often caution people who get their facts from any internet sauce, let alone wikipedia about relying on what is inevitably a pink-glassesed biased 'own interpretation' of the law since it invariably involves cherry-picking and fact-finding of what you wanted to find.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FapFapFap
I don't really see what a disclaimer would do though, since people will imagine whatever they like. It's not like a picture can be above or below the age of consent anyway.
...A picture can still be sexual in nature without visible genitals, a picture with genitals in it isn't necessarily sexual.
|
This is very much the case. All art is subjective and I believe AotK has some very, very good rules as existing in the gallery that I believe have kept the galleries very clear of drama and issues for a long time. With the very obvious exception of Rejuve, something to which sexualisation and infants are so consistantly linked it is outright banned.
Nevertheless, a handful of creepy-sounding comments on an otherwise decent piece of art is a sideeffect of enthuseasm which is something to be handled carefully.
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowlest
However, in others, the disclaimer would be little more than empty words. Many teenage looking subjects can be of age, but when the subject looks to be no older than 10... the words have little weight.
|
This is very much the case. We frequently must step on RPs where the OP states "These characters are 18 and over." that devolves after a handful of posts to;
>sniff 'dadddy pls don whip me bummy mor, plssssss''' snifffs
>yes you have been bad he said raising HIS LATHER STREAP you must be spanked moree then you will get a diapper on your peepee!
Its meaningless to make such assertions when its so cynically exploited.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greyrain
to be frank most people probably don't even bother. I've seen images on gelbooru and danbooru that are clearly adult that had their rating set at Questionable instead of Explicit that was clearly blatant hard core porn.
...that's probably a by-product of laziness on the uploader's part since image ratings on both of those booru' sites default to questionable when you don't set a rating.
...finding images that are missing tags they should have (like seeing a spanking pic that doesn't have a spanking tag for example)
|
This is the ultimate flaw is the premise of this thread and its something that I've raised repeatedly as the number two problem with any form of flagging or filtering. Of which there are many problems.
The largest majority of the worst uploads come from a small minority (and by small, I would indicate a group of less than a dozen inviduals) who don't give a flying fuck about descriptions, titles, tags or anything else. Even when given bans for uploading child content...
they REREGISTER NEW ACCOUNTS and continue uploading.
Uploading is more important to these people than continued, uninterupted membership. They would rather post than live.
And they would never, ever use the tag. Most of our artists wouldn't use the tag - why use something that means that your thumbnails become blocked for the majority of the site who have filters set to default?!
What problems could such a system solve other than just creating more burdonsome moderation on this sites volunteers? Yes, by that I largely meant me >_>;;
.
To the Topic in hand, having dealt with the existing, I would like to state a few points:-
- The sites rules.
- - Site rules are pretty clear for the gallery, although a large subjective element exists.
- - This subjective element exists to contain cynical loopholing, not to give moderators a wide sweeping broom.
- - It makes it clear that 'Anime Age,' the age to which the vast majority of anime characters adhere as a drawing style, is acceptable in sex and sexualisation. Loli and Shota is not.
- - Sex and Sexual pictures ARE ALLOWED on this site for the under 18s. We draw the line well above juveniles and infants.
- - Sex and Sexualisation are NOT ALLOWED on this site for young characters.
- - Lets not get into a debate about Ephebophillia.
- - - The rules are here:
http://animeotk.com/forum/showthread...ding-1057.html
- Compromise.
- - This is required. I could make a semi-political statement about the requirement of Universal Sufferage - an acceptance that you will not always get your own way or what you want - to make democracy work. Which is why it doesn't work for so many countries around the world were the population did not adopt the system through mutal consent... but it would get picked on. Don't, I mean that. Just take it from me,
Some Compromise is required or the whole system collapses.
- - This site has both Adult Spanking members, who enjoy primarily art of adults engaged in adult discipline such as: BDSM; Sexual; revenge-punishments and; less-consensual domestic discipline
AND this site has child-spanking members, who enjoy primarily art of children engaged in parental punishment or art of them engaged in spanking with their peers.
- - So far, this site has done something very, very difficult and given a home to BOTH. This is uncommon. The majority of spanking sites and spanking forums very, very quickly become home to only one kind. I could list a dozen sites right now (but won't, that might be considered flaming) where child-spanking element has driven all other members off and they've *fled* from it. Vice-versa, I've seen adult/BDSM only sites where draconian rules on age, against parental/familial scenes has seen any who even attempt to raise the question of anything else instantly banned on grounds of being 'Disgusting' and instantly labelled as pedo's due to the inability of those adult-spankers to seperate sex from their fetish.
- This topic has, I feel, largely diverted from the question of Obligations to Content, to the debate on the Restriction of Content.
- - I caution against the discussion of restricting content based on age, clothing content or on participants.
- - I caution equally against the discussion of law, especially the US's, for the liberalisation of content.
- - This is a subjective matter and has the site not already got solid rules that are sufficient?
@ MR AZ
I'd note that of the four pictures you've posted, I don't see any 'super-underage' about any of them. Indeed CM_Zs intitution drawing the characters appear to be approaching thier mid-20s? I don't see any reason for any of the four why the artist couldn't slap an 'over 18 only tag' on it and have it apply. Even the first two are drawn with muscular, well-defined characters without loli or shota drawing styles.
I grant that all show genitals, but as noted this is not by site rules restricted by an 18s only limit, therefore are you simply suggesting that 'sailor-moon style blank nudity' is more pallatable?
Debates about content notwithstanding I don't feel thats a widely held view by either camp.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MR AZ
What I am completely confused about now that this site was very much described as a porn site is why, if we know that for 90% of the people here get excited about spanking, we allow children being portrayed in pictures then? In a very logical way we're then allowing porn including minors, given how it's most people's fetish.
Shouldn't we go for only adults in pics?
|
No, we shouldn't allow only adults. That would be a very, very different site from the one we've been for more than 7 years now.
Fantasy is not reality, I would doubly-caution you from linking people interested in parental spanking from a sexual interest in children. Thats completely false and take it from me its offensive also.
.
I'm not attempting to shut down this discussion, hence a deliberate attempt at the avoidance of any 'pronouncement' style language or to make it sound like I'm making rulings.
Obligatory descriptions in pictures with genitalia shown
