After an incident where anti-loli false flaggots got an account wrongfully banned for cp, ottman decided to ban loli by making false arguments similar to what 8chan owner jim watkins and gab owner andrew torba made.
Minds userbase is having none of it, and are actively calling ottman out for lying while demanding this decision be reversed.
new edit: ottman is having a meltdown, calling people bots and deleting posts.
edit: the mods need to consider banning the anti-loli spergs on this site for pointless infighting.
These bans don't seem to have done anything good for 8chan or Gab. Meanwhile Twitter gets to let such content fly so long as it's under the radar.
Alternative social media is in a "damned if they do, damned if they don't" corner on this issue. I would like to see just one of them try Twitter's approach.
Twitter refused to remove child porn spam that was posted by a sextortionist, even after the minor in question and their family provided proof he was underage.
Alternative sites should just have fundraising ready to fight questionable laws if necessary.
Twitter allows actual child porn to stay up for months and refuses to take it down, they're getting sued for it atm.
It's Twitter, nothing will happen to them.
Alternative sites on the other hand get Thanos'd like Gab's banks and Parler.
THIS might get Twitters peepee slapped because minor and he has receipts of Twitter saying no. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/twitter-sued-by-sex-trafficking-survivor
Honestly, I think it does help, but not for the way you think it does.
Yes, every provider will still go after them. Every tech company, every financial company, every company. But it seems to be a struggle to arrest every single person involved in running the site and putting them in prison for 35 years for being part of a 'child porn ring', along with putting a significant number of users in prison as well.
These places know that the establishment is prepared to use unlimited force, but is not willing to commit those resources if they aren't ensured a win. So for now, they need to pick their battles intelligently. Porn is just going to create massive legal headaches, and create an avenue of approach that will be exploited until everyone involved in running those sites is dead and most of their users arrested.
All that is required to kick it off is a communist agitator dropping files from his own stash.
Meanwhile, Twitter and Facebook will never have that concern.
Twitter has refused to remove sextorition, and Facebook has live-streamed murders & terrorism. Not a peep from the establishment.
The internet is getting more cucked by the day.
I bet this thread was a fun one for you to sift through.
I'm still going through it, but the reports are few.
Please don't tell users to kill themselves, though.
Reminder that it is not at all unreasonable to assume that every single anti-loli complainer is a pedophile. Not just because it makes perfect sense, but because of mountains of evidence.
I just stumbled on here from an outside link, and I'm starting to think the same thing. I'm not a fan of loli but I've never thought of "real" kids when I saw it. I assume people who like anime porn have a particular fetish - like furries. Generally loli fans wouldn't like CP, furries aren't into bestiality. In reverse, pedophiles and dog-fuckers might be into loli/furry art because they see everything through a sick lens, but it's probably not as satisfying as the real thing to them.
Can confirm, I'm into petite women and dislike big breasts. If I was to "translate" what I see when I look at loli art (obviously not the stuff that looks like a kid, I just find that cute, and find it kind of weird when it's sexual), the best description would be just... petite women with cute faces.
I also don't give a single solitary shit if some pedo looks at it and sees a kid, if anything, I'm glad - that means they can live their life without victimising anyone, at least.
Its a hard problem.
On one hand you can say "just ban it" then you turn your service into the loli police, waste a ton of resources in a quagmire of edge cases, and probably still get blamed for the original sin if you miss any or don't agree with the busybodies who seek it out just to be outraged.
On the other you say "anything legal in the host country" and you open to accusations of child porn about which there can be no rational discussion.
Banning it will also result in wasted police and court resources, especially if said ban is actively enforced like what is happening in South Korea.
That is the biggest elephant that anti loli people miss. If you banned it all you do is waste people's time and resources going after anime instead of helping anyone real.
That's literally the goal. Every single anti-loli person is a pedophile with a guilty conscience and sometimes even a child predator. This has been proven time and time again.
Banning it prevents wasted police and court resources, since it protects your Korean users from being persecuted by their government for visiting your site.
dumb idea here but why not give the users a means to block tags user's or other filtering methods let them curate what they see and don't and give user's a means to add as an opt in suggested tags that the filters can use in case of a mis-tagged post perhaps even add common filter lists for those who can't be arsed to make their own
Not speaking to this issue specifically, but while this might be a nice feature, it will not placate those who want to shut down the platform for allowing views they don't like. It's not like they ever took advantage of Twitter's block function instead of calling for people they didn't even interact with to be kicked off the platform.
They don't want to ignore you, they want to silence you.
i know it's more to make it so those who are actually wanting to filter it out can and gives a convenient use the block list shut up to use
No one would care if nsfw was mandatory for all loli related content, same goes for other things too.
Tags only really work on art sites.
I said this way back on reddit when alternative sites are being discussed:
Loli is the canary in the coal mine.
It's perfectly legal content.
When it gets banned specifically it means that the site admins have begun ramping up ideological censorship and it will only grow and take over more concepts.
Whatever you may think about about loli doesn't matter. What matters are the arguments used to nix it, and those arguments in favor universally give site admins grounds to expand censorship beyond simple pornographic or lewd content, unless ALL pornography is banned as a base.
What you need to take away from this is that censorship on minds will snowball from here. It already was not a place for free discussions. Now that will get worse.
Okay, then try and make that argument.
Write it out.
Explain how the allowance of a drawn image "opens the door" to something worse.
Doesn't matter at all.
Child porn is still illegal and by good arguement.
The issue is of censorship of drawings and writings.
What pedos do with them doesn't matter as long as they aren't abusing children, which again is still a crime.
Found the pedo transcel faggot
Never said it needs to be social or morally acceptable.
The point is that your attacking such content on such flimsy grounds will bite you in the ass.
Already has in the UK and Australia. So keep that censorious shit out of my only already half broken country pls and ty.
Considering it seems people wanting to waste people's time and resources going after loli instead of actual pedo I'd say it's the opposite.
legality =/= morality
if i had a site i'd ban loli on principle and i'd happily spread that ideology with the argument that it's fucked up and should be banned
don't be a pedo
Then you've established that you're willing to censor information for ideological reasons and will soon come to ban speech.
You either ban all porn, or you allow drawn images like loli, gore, and bestiality.
Has nothing to do with pedophilia or liking the images themselves. It's a litmus test for ideological censorship. If you ban loli on ideological grounds saying that you don't like it, you and others involved in the site will expand that reasoning to other topics. It's a very slippery slope.
Sure, let's do it.
the world banning murder saying that they don't like it is really just an ideological act, really it only set precedent for all these other pesky laws...
Okay wise guy.
What's the difference between a murder and a drawing of a murder?
if i jack it to dying hookers in gta v it's as bad as jacking it to real dead hookers
So killing a hooker in GTA:V should be punished the same as killing a hooker on the corner of MLK and 4th?
jacking it to a dead hooker signifies the same mental issues whether it is a picture of a real dead hooker or a dead hooker in gta v
could you stop dancing around words? you just look stupid, you can't do it right
Yeah, let’s ban all porn. If the alternative is weird, braincel faggots like you happily stroking to drawings of kids, let the coomers suffer
Bruh.
this is the most annoying thing to argue about. Its always people arguing with emotions and no logic. And also its just trendy for jackasses to witchhunt and attack anime whilst ignoring all the actual real problems. And the CEO would be hypocritical and lying to ban it over shitty lying cancellers
I agree. Watching these degenerates squirm and try to justify their predilection is tiresome.
not really squirming. And nothing much to justify, more like certain others why the cartoon characters need their protection so much that they want to waste people's time and resources witch hunting it and ignoring all the real problems.
Here's a test: look your mother in the eye and tell her that it's okay that you beat off to pictures of cartoon children performing sex acts because they aren't real children.
She wouldn't like his son jerking over anything unless it's a real girlfriend. Not really a good question.
If you can't look your mother in the eye and tell her you're doing something, you shouldn't be doing it.
Stupid argument cause there's a lot of things people don't tell their parents . but I've told her that I defend it and I have stated reasons why. What else do you have?
Look your mother in the eye and tell her about all the porn you have watched.
Look your mother in the eye and tell her about all the dirty thoughts you have had.
Look your mother in the eye and tell her all your darkest secret.
Do you tell your mother everything? Do you need your mother's permission for everything?
Why have fun at this point? Just be a robot and do everything she wants you to do. That means stop spending countless hours arguing with strangers on the internet instead do something productive.
You're either a disingenuous fag or shoot retarded if you can't comprehend what I said. But, in case you are shoot retarded: If you can't look your mother in the eye it means that you're ashamed of whatever it is you're doing. If you're already subconsciously ashamed of that thing you're doing, you should knock it off. Shame leads to self-loathing, which leads to depression, which leads you to arguing that drawings of children getting molested is okay on the Internet.
Here's the logic: the people who enjoy this kind of smut are the kind of people that drive around in panel vans asking little kids if they want to see something cool in the back seat. Those people are dangerous and should be tagged and monitored.
Now what tickles me pink is that everyone in this thread defending lolicon are conveniently silent when it's brought up that they are defending illustrated pornography of children. I wouldn't have an issue with this if any of you were actually honest about what it is you're defending, but none of you are. You're twisting yourselves into knots trying to get out of that admission. And it's kind of funny that you don't seem to want to talk about what kind of people are interested in viewing this material. Nor do you seem to want to talk about why anyone who isn't a complete scumbag would have an issue with not only the material, or the kind of people who want to view it. Really makes ya think.
look if you want to go around screaming about trying to force people to say they are pedo because of fictional anime characters then just say so. . Honestly lolicon has been around for decades and it wasn't an issue until recently when it suddenly became trendy to start whining and crying about it. With all the energy being wasted on loli, you'd think you could actually have helped some actual person by now.
Found the pedophile. Spill the beans, what did you get convicted for?
saddens me how KIA is degeneracy-friendly sometimes, it really clashes with the overall basedness. how do you point out globohomo and then jack it to little kids in the same hour?
Degenerates are precedent. The laws and weapons used to strike them will never stop with them.
Its amazing how people can understand instantly how that is a bad idea with guns and speech, but suddenly it offends their world view and its totes okay.
world view? it's pedophilia you sick fuck
if i only jacked it to 2d horses i'd still be into bestiality, same as you're into children moron
"oh no wait actually the horse is a human that merely looks like a horse so it's okay"
god you disgust me
No its a picture that was made without a victim. What is done with it might be pedophilia.
Nor was that the point you neatly side stepped because you don't have any argument against it. Which is that this is the soft sell, easy target that they know emotional chodes will sell out happily, to grant them the precedent and tools to oppress actual important things further.
You know, that thing they have successfully done to guns and our speech for years. But don't worry, this time it certainly is because they care so much about our children and nothing else.
Comment Reported for: Justifying censorship.
Comment Approved: I will not ideologically purify this forum.
Leave the site. You are not welcome. Not only are you pro-censorship but you're also a pedophile.
its not kids and i should rewrite the post. Didnt say i like something but I have said i defend it for the same reason cause i think its similar to the 1980s fear mongering over fiction and irrational and leftists have taken to calling everything in anime pedo so not moving an inch
i call being attracted to children pedophilia
loli is small children
loli is pedophilia
Not children and trying to act like it is by calling it pedo only cheapens the word .
I call being against lolis pedophilia.
You are a pedophile. Turn yourself in.
For all the people against loli stuff, please at least stop calling it "cartoon child porn", because it really isn't comparable at all to actual child porn. Actual child porn involves incredibly damaging actions and consequence for the victims, and I think it's in incredibly poor taste to even suggest that the abuse and suffering they went through can even come close to the potential damage of an entirely fictional depiction*.
I understand your distaste for it and the desire to frame it as badly as possible, but every time I see it, it says to me "hey, child that was betrayed and attacked by people who you should have been able to trust to love and care for you, who likely damaged and traumatized you in a way that permanently altered your ability to form meaningful relationships or even function in society, you see this drawing? What happened to you is the same level of bad as this fictional scenario." I get the intention is to try and make people see it as bad as the real thing, but to me, you are cheapening and reducing the truly horrifying nature and consequences of it. You wouldn't say someone having a Tamagotchi die and an actual living pet die is at all comparable, so why is it the same here?
*There have been cases of artists using real stuff/people for "reference", and in that case it might as well be the same as victimizing them all over again.
There have been cases where people just call pornographic artwork "child porn" despite the fact that doing so is defamatory, and I think that no one other than these retarded spergs would care if calling it that is banned, just as long as charged phrases such as "drawn child porn" remained legal.
And yes, I agree that calling it "drawn child porn" could be disrespectful to sex trafficking survivors who were forced to participate in child porn.
Never forget the massive titty, very tall sorceress from Dragon's Crown was called child porn by games journos.
You know, those guys with way too much power and sway that are the root of these KIA places being founded.
It's illustrated pornography of children. There's no way around that and no amount of rationalization from the people who create and fap to this stuff will change that.
Indeed, much like how playing Call of Duty is artistic criminal plotting and attempting murder. After all, pixels are real people! Fiction == Reality! Ride on my sibling-of-undeclared-gender-and-pronouns! Together we ride that soapbox! Down with video games, for every time someone plays a game of Civilization, they're LITERALLY committing artful genocide upon the world!
I am glad I've finally found my people, those who know that writing about something is the same as doing it, and making a picture worth 1000 words is equivalent of doing the action 1000 times. Glory be! Our next target shall be Monopoly, for violating property management tax laws!
Why am I not surprised a fucking French Canadian is defending pederasty.
I'm not, my undeclared-gender-and-pronouns-sibling! I am with you! Perhaps the first target was too ambitious? We can instead go after the Protestant Church, for their holy book depicts actually-they're-over-900-years-olds and also details people underage mating! AND common-law housing arrangements without proper taxation treatment! Not to mention the mass murders! As bad as George R. R. Martin's filthy lolicon books, they are!
I don't think you understand in any capacity where your argument leads nor what it will be used for.
I'm not advocating for the removal of lolicon, I'm advocating for the removal of the people who enjoy lolicon. They should be rounded up and shipped off to an island in the pacific where they can't harm any children.
If you had said child molesters I'd agree with the condition that they are simply shot.
Instead you've created an extrinsic factor and entangled wrongthink and "the worst of crimes" into fictional, drawn images.
What you're doing is creating a broken standard the same as leftists who say that those who misgender trannies should go to jail or die.
You're setting up a precedent that will be used against you.
imagine supporting censorship
Ottmon is having a meltdown not talking rationally and not taking personal accountability for his turning back on his previous statements, and calling people bots and deleting posts? So basically acting like an sjw.
Post Reported for:
This post isn't pornographic.
There is no pedophillia in this thread. Mass purging of users would be an abuse of my powers.
And now minds is banning people not just for loli but for the "canonical ages of characters" What did we fucking tell you.
All these furious anti-loli folks be like:
https://kotakuinaction2.win/p/12hl5BHzUp/reset-the-clock/c/
I'd like to avoid using my mod powers to purge dissent.
Loli is pedophilia-lite you degenerate faggots. Christ is king.
And if you let "lolicon" get banned for arbitrary reasons you just let a censorious mob get their foot in the door and gave them a platform to launch valid attacks on other targets.
Which is why instead go the opposite way and say, "No we will not ban it."
What you're doing is ceding ground and letting them take over more and more rooms in your house, and justifying it by saying, "Well they like certain drawings so I'm glad they got shot."
You're completely ignoring the fact that leftists gain ground and you lose ground. You get DnC'd and applaud it.
I'm not a libertarian, nor is my argument libertarian.
What I'm telling you is that it doesn't matter what your moral argument is. Left or right doesn't matter.
It WILL be used against you.
You are doing nothing but giving a loaded gun to people who hate you, but you think it's good because you win some tiny and irrelevant personal moral victory.
You're again ignoring my argument and setting up your own strawman.
Read it again.
It doesn't matter what you think the left will do.
You will concede more and more ground to assuage your ego thinking you struck some kind of blow when in reality all you did was to help tighten the noose around your neck.
Pedos yes, lolicons no. Many pedos go against lolicons to distract people from actual problems and then turn out to be outed as actual pedo themselves. And the leftists have taken to calling everything anime as pedo honestly you give them an inch on it and they keep going on about it.
Comment Reported for: Rule 3 - Harassment
Comment Removed: Rule 2, way over the line against a user.
the guy is calling people who like pornographic artwork pedophiles.
What kind indeed. I noticed no one responded to you
Artwork that may or may not depict characters of a certain age of which sexual depiction is frowned upon in just about every country on earth. Loli is female, shota is male.
Whether you believe it's moral or not is up to you.
Evil is not evil is not evil. Looking at KOS-MOS, at one year old because it's an android but drawn as a fully developed woman who has all the knowledge of the most war-torn adult, and looking at Mieu, a one year old android but drawn as a fully developed woman but who is entirely innocent and clueless of the world and sexuality, and looking at Chachazero, a one year old android (lots of them exist, apparently) who is drawn as an underdeveloped woman but who is knowledgable about the roles of sexuality and maturity in society, and... Hmm... I'm drawing a blank for a one-year-old android that is both ignorant and underdeveloped to round out the quadrant, but you get the point I'm sure one exists.
Each one of the four quadrants starts with "one-year-old android". But KOS-MOS, with a form of an adult and the mind of an adult (if a PTSD-filled psychotic one), clearly isn't "loli" by most definitions except the broadest technical sense. The Terminator isn't a shota, but by strict definition, Arnold Schwartzenegger is, indeed, a shota actor, because that sentient humanoid isn't over 18 years, and he appears naked in some scenes. The scandal!
So your definition of "certain age" doesn't work.
The other three quadrants are trickier. The one I couldn't think of an example of, yeah, obviously shota/loli. Child-like in mentality and appearance (and age, as all four are 1-year-old robots). That's bad. But what of Mieu, physically adult-scale, but mind of a child? Obviously, that's bad, right? The whole point of the laws is to protect child innocence and minds. But if I showed you a picture of Mieu, you would not know she had that tabula-rasa mind. And does that mean innocent idiots are never legally adults? And in quadrant three, does someone with, say, puberty blockers so they don't grow like standard kids never qualify as an adult no matter their age or wisdom? Now, Chachazero, being a SMART one-year-old android, commissioned an adult body to be made for herself. At what point in the data transfer process does it go from Loli to not? If they copy-paste instead of cut-paste, is she simultaneously both despite being the same entity?
There's a reason the official definition for these things is "I'll know it when I see it", because simply defining something as you did, leaves much to be desired. Too many loopholes to close.
So TL;DR: Your definition is bad. The proper definition is "it is 100% subjective, but ideally subjective based upon a communal agreed-upon case-by-case assessment."
[EDIT: And before you say "but true-AI androids don't exist!", they do in anime and video games and books. And we're talking about books, not things that exist in real life. So you need a definition that includes magic, ageless entities, aliens with accelerated lifecycles, and robots.]
The physical age of a non-human is not relevant to the question. A newly constructed Terminator does not look like a newborn, does not think like a newborn and does not act like a newborn, so it does not possess any of the attributes of a child that would appeal to a pedophile. On the other hand only a pedophile would want to sexualise Grogu from the Mandalorean, because despite being described as 50 years old he looks, thinks and acts like a child.
Ah, but the Terminator DOES act like a child. He acts upon pure id and simple instruction. His mental immaturity is, in fact, a part of why he loses in Terminator 1, and is core to the character development in Terminator 2. He is "innocent". There's plenty of scenes in T2 where the actual literal child is giving him morality, sociality, and life lessons, because his own mind is less developed than that of said child. While I would not pretend to know the machinations of how a pedophile works internally, I leave that to your experienced mind, The Terminator does act like some real children would if you'd give them a machine gun, I imagine, knowing the callousness and carelessness of youth.
And that's yet again a reason why it is difficult to define in fictional settings with exceptional circumstances.
But here's a key point. Because the Terminator LOOKS old, you're fine with it, despite the EXACT OPPOSITE being the purpose of Law (It is to protect the innocent regardless of appearance, not protect people who look innocent regardless of actual). You're starting from a biological purpose standpoint, not a legal or societal one: You do not risk harm people before sexual maturity because it puts at risk the future reproduction of your species, but turn a blind eye to those who are past sexual maturity physically, a literal blind eye, you did not see the clear evidence across four hours of film footage that the whole point of The Terminator is that it is not socially mature. A fine standpoint, truly little is more concretely moral than our base evolutionary psychology, but that does not map well to fiction. Exceptions in real life, for example the profoundly disabled, also exist to this measure you're using, but that likely will not impact your day-to-day life.
If a man likes pornographic art of women, he's straight. If a man likes pornographic art of men, he's gay. If a man likes pornographic art of children, he's a pedophile.
If someone likes killing people in games they like to shoot people irl . And most of the time when an actual pedo is outed it's a smash player, a furry or someone who was attacking anime or loli. Though even if you think it makes someone pedo, unrealistic cartoon art is still a better alternative to keep them away from irl wouldn't it?
I disagree though my second paragraph covers your point
Why stop there? Why not make children wear hats depicting child pornography? I mean if it could stop even one attack against a child, isn't it our duty to wear child porn hats?
Or maybe society shouldn't be built to appease freaks.
That's a stupid argument that makes no sense and you know it.
Not sure why you are calling for people to suicide over different opinions on fictional things. And I feel like you haven't been here long if you are surprised to be honest. Seems more anti loli which is different actually which makes me think there's new people.
Nope. This sub has always had a blind spot for cartoon child porn. If you didn't know this, then you're the one out of the loop.
I literally I said people being anti loli here makes me think there's new people here.
Just because your cp hasn’t involved any children being hurt in it’s making doesn’t make you any less of a deplorable degenerate. What’s it matter how long I’ve been here? I’ve seen this in almost every sub culture or community I’ve vaguely been a part of, just because you’re older than me, it doesn’t make you cooler, you millennial nonce.
I never said that though it kinda makes sense you are a zoomer getting so uptight about this. And I was just saying if you are surprised there are people who defend loli here it means you are new here. That is all
Oh and calling loli as cp shows you are not interested in having an honest discussion just an emotional one and it's also insulting to people who were actually hurt by real Cp.
Comment Removed - Rule 2
Comment Removed: Rule 2
You're not even talking about a standard legal punishment.
Who cares about democracy, freedom and being able to spread ideas when degenerate cartoon child pornography is threatened.
If you're a leftist, and you want to utterly derail and destroy any attempt to circumvent your total control of all social media, all you have to do is quietly roll the "lolicon" grenade into any upstart conservative effort to create an alternative platform. The pedo apologists and rules lawyers will happily choose cartoon child porn over meaningfully promoting freedom of speech.
Yet those same leftists are probably fucking kids and ok with real CP.
Plenty of people on our side seem to be okay with looking at kids getting fucked, too. I wouldn't be so quick to think we're better.
"kids" tell me more about how cartoon , ink on paper is a kid.
Exactly this. If you start a video hosting platform and say "no porn/hentai: there's already hundreds of sites for that" no one says a thing. But when Gab and now Minds does it for some reason it's a huge fucking deal.
Bitchute bans porn entirely: does anyone care? I've never heard anyone criticize them for it.
A full porn ban is a good and defensible position.
A pick-and-choose system of saying this, that, and the other are ideologically unacceptable creates a foundation for the expansion of censorship. There will always be those who take offense to some kind of content and banning content purely on the grounds of "it's disgusting" will give them greater power to act.
Look at Australia and the UK. They've gradually expanded their arbitrary banning of pornographic content to the point of using it to create full nation level censorship legislation for expanded content.
You are tricked into thinking you're doing good but in reality you're unwittingly doing your enemy's work for them.
Maybe platforms claiming to be free speech should be forthright about why they're banning certain forms of free speech instead of attempting to be moral fags or disingenuous[1] about U.S. laws, assuming liability is the impetus.
1 - This includes not linking to laws that have provisions that may be contrary to illegality, or were struck down in applicability.
Oh, and this argument is also a larp to begin with because I see moral fags in this thread push this liability argument while simultaneously decrying it for ethical reasons in other comments, and labelling everyone that can be even bothered to put up any argument about why censorship might be a bad thing a pedo.
Plenty of condescending little fucks 'lurking' about.
We defend loli content alongside all drawn content because to do otherwise means that we've established a baseline for ideological censorship of speech.
It's you guys who are so set in with emotional baggage that you don't realize you're being baited into laying the foundation for ideological suppression of other content and speech.
Translation: we have a pedo infestation.
cool keep misusing and downplaying the word pedo
its not children and not depictions either its fictional unrealistic cartoon characters
I said this both back on reddit and my other post here:
You and others are completely ignoring the evolution of the arguments against loli.
Those arguments and standings WILL BE and HAVE BEEN used to attack other content and speech.
Just look at the UK and their government's attempts to create a national firewall to ban content and track people who call trannies ugly. It all started with porn.
When you allow moral busybodies to start banning stuff for a glorified "I don't like that" argument don't be surprised when more and more gets banned.
YOU'RE a pedophile? Now that's a twist. I hope you never actually harmed a child, though. I actually liked you, that'd suck.
Considering this discussion goes nowhere but screaming "you are a pedo, and you should die" rather than any discussion about how it should be banned and what are the ramifications of doing so its probably well described as pointless.
Nobody is shocked the moral crusaders can do nothing but screaming "think of the children!" like they always have, as their ability to logically think shuts down.
It is this one? Because I don't disagree and that's the kind of discussion to be had. I argued some time ago in regards to either Parler or Gab having the same controversy that a blanket, from the start, "no porn" clause would have avoided all the problems. Or at least no treat it as a moral soapbox while you do it so you don't rile up said coomers.
But, you can see from this entire discussion most people have opened with "get the rope" and that's its not a facade to say talking about this is pointless.
Typically this topic brings out the worst in you people. I hope to christ none of you motherfuckers are ever left alone with kids.
Comment Removed: Rule 2