Accepted Why is spraying Lolicon/3D rendered underage girls in sexual positions not punishable?

Spoiler: some hot loli porn here guys check it out

sike, its our lord and savior zero two

 

What if someone posts a girl in a tribal setting? Google 'African Tribal Clothes', and you can find all sorts of examples of people, young and old, in even more revealing clothes than OP, but I would hardly call it sexual (Again, OP image was definitely a sexual depiction and shouldn't be allowed)

I guess what I'm getting at is, less clothing doesn't necessarily mean sexual or sexual intent. Context matters. In most countries that play on this server, there is an automatic sexualization of people's bodies, but there are many places in the world where it's just not looked upon like that, which is why I feel that having it remain a grey-ish area isn't the worst thing in the world. Saying 'Skin=Bad' is just prudish behavior, and on the most extreme end, is what led to the Hijab and similar clothing articles. And keep in mind, even in Muslim culture, children don't have to cover up, because they aren't viewed as sexual objects

 

So shut your door? How many people do you have enter your room?

 

Context does(should) not matter when its an underage girl in revealing clothing in a gmod server as a spray. Who cares why they are wearing little amount of clothes? Theres no reason to use it as your spray.

 

Jassa with his morals, LOL.

 

Lets say someone posts an image from a charity drive for starving Africans. On that image is a young girl wearing little more than a loincloth to cover up below, and heavy beads to cover her chest. All explicit parts are completely covered, however. Does that person deserve to be warned or banned? Or should we ignore/hide certain aspects of a culture different than ours, just because some people are creeps?

 

We're talking about sprays. look at the title.

 

Are you attempting to miss the point on purpose orrrr?

 

No, I get the point. I'm saying there are sprays that would fit the criteria of bannable/warnable, even though they don't really deserve it. And lets not forget, an image disallowed on the server is not allowed on the forums either. All I am saying is context matters, and you shouldn't dismiss it out of hand.

 

yes lets remove all sprays from the servers next up will be all the guns, because who supports violence?! NOT ME!

 

This is my Halloween profile pic. If the rules were enforced without taking in any form of context or ambiguity, it would be classified as a gore spray. Exposed brain, exposed bone, etc. The red lines could probably be seen as blood on the bitten ear.


Technicality defines our server's rules. If there is a grey area on something, it's because those technicalities do not always fit. Yes, the vast majority of sprays depicting children in few clothes are going to be sexual in nature, and should be reported and dealt with. But there are some sprays that are simply not. If a rule cannot be fairly enforced 100% of the time when unambiguously applied, it should be left to discretion.

 

Depends heavily on the art style, Cute style like that picture are fine, but when it contains underage in skimpy or no clothes then it's not fine, it's a pretty obvious set of rules and you're just trying to push the buttons to see how far they go.

Example

Spoiler: CUte

Would pass, but a real heart would be considered gore.

 

That is not a good comparison at all. There is a HUGE difference between cartoon gore like this (not even gore tbh) and cartoon lolicon.

 

The image wasn't "gray area" because having a sexualized child as a spray is completely okay. It was gray in our rules because we don't differentiate between normal nudity/porn and those involving a child in the base comparison. The image stayed up on the original post for 2 days after at least 1 lead admin, multiple admins, and a huge portion of the moderators saw the image until it was finally removed by HelixSpiral because it was hard to quantify it as breaking the current porn rules while comparing to the standards. The suggestion is to not have a stricter porn rules, but stricter rules for images involving children and underaged sexualization. I completely agree with this notion, we should be stricter with these types.

 

Loli is waterdowned child porn that degenerate pedophiles use to justify their sickness, anybody who defends it needs to check themselves into a hospital

 

No disrespect, but are you guys robots? I get you guys have rules to follow and are scared of screwing up, but come on. If you're so bound by your rule set that you allow loli to freely be posted because there is no specific rule for it then that is a huge problem.

 

That's exactly my point. Nowhere in the rules does it clarify exactly what level of 'gore' content is allowed, but because it's open to interpretation, those two images are completely OK. If it were 100% enforced, all context shoved aside, both our images would and should be removed, according to the ruleset.

I'm saying there is a gradient. Not everyone thinks like you, Roz: Just because I want defined boundaries doesn't mean I want them so we can constantly walk along the edge. It's because I know there are people that do, and I know there are people that will come to that edge by accident.

If we just say "All of X is bad", and X is something that covers many, many different and unique things, I will always urge caution, especially in our modern political climate. It doesn't matter to me if it's on a gaming forum, I love this place. And I would rather we pause and look at all the facets of the situation, instead of having a knee-jerk reaction at just one.

 

It's just sad that you need someone to hold your hand to define every small detail instead of you realizing for yourself what's right and what's wrong.

 

Honestly that pic isn't even gore. The internet term gore is used for pics or vids of real life animals or people that are maimed or killed with gore exposed. You're trying to compare your pic to cartel beheadings tbh. That is why we are like 'what the hell?'

 

Is it really a radical notion to say "let's not plaster barely-clothed or sexualized children on the servers"? Sexual position just makes it more egregious and should under no circumstances be allowed. They don't have to be dressed plainly, but don't sexualize kids tyvm.

I don't care about the 'context' of it. I don't care about tribal African children and their culture. Not in the context of my Christian SGM TTT (and DR I guess) servers.

Spoiler: disgusting tangent

I'm all for diversity and tolerance of others, but tell you what. In some cultures it is not just acceptable but normal - there are rites of passage based on it in fact - that involve children having sex with adults. Does that mean I want people plastering pictures of that shit on the servers? No. Very much no. Fuck no.

If you want to celebrate traditional African cultures, clothes, or bring attention to starvation or whatever, by all means do so. And there may well be some images that could be argued as 'innocent' caught in the crossfire . . .
But I don't want to see a half-naked or sexualized child on my TTT tyvm.

And to stress it again:
I do not care why they're dressed as such or what other cultures think when seeing the same - I, with my culture and upbringing and perspective, find it sickening.
Staff can exercise discretion and warn for these things or simply remove them, that's perfectly okay by me. As long as the end goal and result is that >>>children<<< are not portrayed sexually. Jesus.