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

I was on the server last night and noticed someone was spraying the spray below so I told the staff about it. The mod that was on asked an admin if it was okay and they said it was fine. This spray is clearly a questionable lolicon that is 3D rendered. The guy who posted it knows this and was being edgy.

The spray rule: Porn is defined as "arousing images, videos or depicting sexual activity, or that show general nudity in them. The spray doesn't have to explicitly display these either: even if you cut out the actual part, but the spray can still be understood as one of the above things, it still falls within the rule. Sex toys/objects or sexual liquids are also included in that.

This is 100% an 'arousing' image with partial nudity. Either change the rule or enforce it tbh. People have shown me sprays that got them banned that were far more tame than this. I don't understand this selective enforcement.

 

Sprays and the ways they are handled differ from mod to mod and admin to admin (vice versa for higher ups). Some are lenient, some aren't. I personally don't find that worth a ban, maybe a warning to the player for them to change it at the most.

 

I don't know about you, but I don't enjoy having to look at realistic looking loli. It's disgusting and pretty degenerate. Yes, I can clear the spray myself but why should it have to come to that?

 

That's a pretty weird spray, although I think I'm missing the sexual aspect of it to be honest.

 

the extremely thin and barely covering clothing

 

you just don't want to lose your loli...

 

As much as people don't really care about my opinion, I have to agree with @Onion Wizard here. After the whole ordeal with @Skippy Dinglebopper getting banned for a video that said "It gets hard when I pull on it", seemingly only for the contextual purpose it shows, I would've thought that there would have been a bit of a crackdown on sharing these kinds of things.

But don't worry about my opinions on serious topics. My name is The Memelord.

 

Loli is bad :/

 

Here's the problem. It's more of the wording and discretion placed into this porn rule.
The wording clearly prohibit certain stuff, however, there are a lot of grey areas that aren't covered by the porn rules.
Thus, we have to use discretion to cover some of those grey area.
In other words, we have to look at sprays case by case scenario.
Some sprays that are blatantly porn spray (that are cropped) are let go because it doesn't break rules as per say along with the fact that we don't want to be overly draconian on such rules.
Other sprays are erased because we deem them as something a bit more clearer in showing what it meant to show.
The rest of the cases are bans because either the person has been warned for such, has history of going around the borders with sprays, etc.
We just don't have a system for evaluating the grey areas that porn rules don't cover.
Hence, why we do it case by case.
We just have different idea and approach to each spray or "case".
This can include some of sprays that people might see as porn sprays.

Thus, the main problem lies on mixture of how the porn rules worded, how the grey area is approached, and how we interpret the wording.

This is the same case for disgusting and gore content as well as the rest of porn content that aren't sprays.

Edited: Miss couple wordings.

 

First of all, the spray linked isn't a Loli because a Loli is an underage anime girl and thats just a 3D rendered girl. Non the less, I believe that just normal Loli's are fine (don't take that in the wrong way). As for the sexual positions, weather its a Loli or a 3D anime girl or even a above age girl, I believe that its not good to have thoes type of things on the server considering a lot of underage people play on the server. Although, that's just my opinion.

 

To be completely honest, there's so much gray area with these things that staff don't even know what to do with most of the gray images. Almost every time you'd see a staff posting in Discord to ask for opinions from other staff on the spray. It's very rare for any action on gray images be decided on by a single person or mod. We don't a specific standard for it, but staff left a broad definition to enforce it on the gradient of gray areas for this very reason.

 

It's a little disturbing to me that things like are actually viewed as a "gray area". It's an underage girl in incredibly thin clothing. How people can see something fucking disgusting like this and seriously think "Yeah, this is fine." is why we end up with pedos in the staff team in the first place.

 

:Zippermouth:

 

I can imagine those clothes on a dancer or acrobat fairly easily. Yes, it's bare, but less than a bikini or similar article. Can it be taken as sexual? Definitely. But if I saw that on a stage, or at a festival, I wouldn't think of it that way one bit. Hell, I'd probably be appreciative of it as a form of 'art', as odd as that sounds, if they were that physically flawless. Age, and even gender, would be irrelevant, because it's a display of physical 'perfection', which can mean a lot more than sex.

That being said, I also don't have a sexual attraction the human form in general, so there is a good chance I'm an outlier. Though, I would find it difficult to believe there would be so few people who would appreciate it without the sexual aspects.


However, I do have issues with this picture: The heels and the heavy makeup. It really does change the intent of the display, at least to me, though I am having hard time describing why. The fact it's a created media, not a photograph, also makes me pause.


Not so sure I explained this all correctly, but at least I probably sound pretentious and/or creepy!

 

i think this is a loli we're talking about bro...

an acrobat doesn't wear that kind of explicit clothing. prove me wrong

 

Yep, that's pretty fucking weird.

 

what a dumb spray honestly, aint got nothing on my spray game

 

I'm not familiar enough with the names of the shows to provide images, but there are plenty of circuses or similar programs that dress their acrobats in all sorts of outfits. Less is more, as a requirement to the profession, and not everyone wants to wear a unitard. I'm sure you can find plenty of examples, of both the clearly serialized and images that are more tasteful and artistic, if you searched through Arabic shows.

Dancers have more leeway, but when it's a dance that focuses on the body's subtle movements, revealing is almost a requirement, otherwise you would miss the more intricate steps. It's rare for children to be able to perform such dances, or acrobatics, but those that can would be more than welcome in any show: That kind of achievement is appreciated, by showmaster and audience alike.

And I'm not trying to underplay how there are people who are just creepy as fuck and want to see half-naked children. But there is also significant artistic value, and I'd hate to see that lost because of some creeps.

Just to be clear, I do think this particular image is just meant to be a sexualized child. I'm just trying to encourage a more open mind on this sorta thing

 

are those dancers 12 years old.

 

Exceptionally few of them, but some, yes. Most children don't have the skills required, like I said. Those that do are highly valued.