Warning: the follow post may be controversial as it contains discussion of underage characters. If this may bother you, do us and yourself a favor and simply do not read.
So y!Gallery recently decided to remove all toddlercon (erotic art involving young kids--like, REALLY young--like toddlers) from their hosting based on a poll. After repeatedly assuring us the Terms of Service would not change based on the poll.
My personal stance is that artists should be allowed to draw whatever the hell they want. But thanks anyway y!Gallery! Because it's okay to dump on a minority as long as they're not popular, eh, eh? (remember when they tried doing this to furries for a while? Hahahah, ohh, good times)
What the hell is this? Muscle shota? Are they teenagers or is it just kinda chibi-styled? How old are these guys exactly? HOW CAN YOU TELL?
But anyway, I got pretty miffed over the whole thing because, woo? Needless censorship? Yeah, I know. Getting upset over y!Gallery drama. Some people just don't learn from their mistakes.
But in retaliation I totally wanted to do a babyporn post. But . . . I don't actually have any babyporn. Instead, here's a bunch of pics I've always held off on posting because there was even an underage character present (even when the the art was totally innocent and/or the erotic focus of the piece is on the bara man) (yeah, I do get paranoid about posting some things but really? C'mon now)
And besides, they're cute!
If anyone knows what show this is from please tell me.
Kids are cute.
So y!Gallery recently decided to remove all toddlercon (erotic art involving young kids--like, REALLY young--like toddlers) from their hosting based on a poll. After repeatedly assuring us the Terms of Service would not change based on the poll.
My personal stance is that artists should be allowed to draw whatever the hell they want. But thanks anyway y!Gallery! Because it's okay to dump on a minority as long as they're not popular, eh, eh? (remember when they tried doing this to furries for a while? Hahahah, ohh, good times)
What the hell is this? Muscle shota? Are they teenagers or is it just kinda chibi-styled? How old are these guys exactly? HOW CAN YOU TELL?
But anyway, I got pretty miffed over the whole thing because, woo? Needless censorship? Yeah, I know. Getting upset over y!Gallery drama. Some people just don't learn from their mistakes.
But in retaliation I totally wanted to do a babyporn post. But . . . I don't actually have any babyporn. Instead, here's a bunch of pics I've always held off on posting because there was even an underage character present (even when the the art was totally innocent and/or the erotic focus of the piece is on the bara man) (yeah, I do get paranoid about posting some things but really? C'mon now)
And besides, they're cute!
If anyone knows what show this is from please tell me.
Kids are cute.
CROUP! You could get banned from Blogspot for shotastical images >.<
ReplyDeleteBut beyond that I was actually glad Y!gallery stepped up and pushed toddlercon to the periphery, and I'll tell you why.
I think its terrible that they did it in the form of a poll that was touted as just a "look" at what people want and don't want. If they wanted to changed it they should have just SAID so and made the poll and everyone...probably still would have voted the same way, but with full knowledge that others would be affected.
Why I think its great they finally did something is that Y!gal is a fairly big site for what is is and every other erotic gallery has come down on really young characters knowing that legally they were on a shoestring with being able to protect themselves. Shota is completely illegal in Canada and Britain and BASICALLY illegal here in America.
I questioned Y!gallery a year or so ago on the issue after that one guy in Ohio got arrested and CONVICTED for owning and purchasing loli (the sister to shota hijinks). But the mods swept it under the rug as totally legal and ignored that FA and Rule34 were banning it (It still exists of course but its not supposed to).
I think Y!gallery is finally realizing that scrutiny, legally, is getting higher. Which is why they made toddlercon solely related to the artist so the site is liable. \
But I think they should have presented the issue that way from the BEGINNING. Let people know the situation the site was facing (and how behind they are at dealing with it), and let people decide. I think most people would have voted to limit things to keep the site going rather put it a jeopardy.
It was defensible issue but executed very poorly and we can only hope that Lyint learns from it because I don't think she expected this kind of response, and may not be expecting the fact that the people on Y!gallery will NEVER forget this.
But I hope she does better in the future because I like her but this scenario was a slap in the face to a lot of people.
Like I've said before, the only thing bad about y!Gal is the people running it. As many times as the reins to y! have been passed around, you'd think they would have found someone who can hold them in a mature manner by now, without alienating the site's users. But this is probably far too much to ask of such a group. It's unfortunate, really. y!Gal the site has a very rich set of features that make it very much worth using, but the administration has a seemingly unbreakable history of just shitting all over the site's potential.
ReplyDeleteI'll probably get banned from there after posting this lol.
Jubell, I'm pretty sure none of the images I put up are straight-up obscene, instead going towards the humor/prank end of the spectrum, but just to be safe I removed a couple. (I hate being paranoid)
ReplyDeleteThe cartoon pornography laws in the USA are very muddled and no one ever seems sure exactly what's allowed and what's not. If this were a perfect world there'd be a consensus of "who cares about fantasies drawn on paper/computers, fapp to what you like" but unfortunately that hasn't happened yet?
But yeah, my main beef is that y!Gal basically LIED to everybody. It makes me lose faith in the current mods (y'know . . . even more than I already did)
Not only that, but they deny any censoring is taking place. (putting toddlercon in extras means they don't show up in searches or even the artists' main galleries) It is akin to taking books off the shelf in a library and hiding them way in the back where it's all dusty and most patrons just assume it's a broom closet or something and also maybe ripping all the covers off so people can't see what they are.
AND. AND. Their whole attitude of "because there are not many toddlercon works or artists on the site makes it okay to remove it all" just SERIOUSLY bugs me. There is something extremely wrong about that.
Wohdin, I don't think you can get in trouble there for things you say elsewhere . . . but this IS y!Gal we're talking about so anything is possible. Ha ha . . . ha!
Hmm I know nothing about this really. But I don't see anything wrong with the pictures here. And I don't see why anyone should be punished for their artwork regardless of it's content. (though if it depicts real events of crimes I don't know...)
ReplyDeleteBut does this ToddlerCon have images depicting sex between toddelers and adults?
I get paranoid too Croup, which is why I wanted to say something (If only because you know blogspot looks for ANY excuse to delete gay blogs and lately I've seen tumblr go ban happy in any blog where shota appears. better-safe-than-a-mango)
ReplyDeleteAlso, I agree with you guys, there are several things wrong here. If they wanted to do it they did it badly. Lyint is still new to being like...completely in control. I think talking to her more would be helpful.
She's been one of the most reasonable of all the mods in every case I've seen. Trying to toe a line between professional distance and helpfulness. But once again...this is a bit like that Anthony Weiner case when he was "hacked"
He wasn't a bad person, but it was hard to overlook the fact that he REALLY screwed up and didn't expect the response he got (and the reacted badly to that response)
Sigh.
---
Additionally I will say: Yes. You can get suspended or banned for what you post in other places if it counts as flaming.
Recall: The case of AbsoluteBlu and the "does this look like a boob?" fiasco. He made a post on his blog and people got penalized for their angry rants. I think DinosaurPrince and maybe Blu himself ended up suspended.
And yes.
I know what you're thinking.
We all thought it then, think it now, and in the end we still have no other place to go.
I can think of at least one instance of someone getting banned on y!Gal because of something that occurred on another website (the specific website in this case being LiveJournal). It's disgusting, but they've been known to do it in the past, so I wouldn't put it past them to do it again.
ReplyDeleteThough I doubt they even know who I am lol. /lurker 4lyfeeee
that one pic is from Zettai Karen Children
ReplyDeleteJust wanted to drop a note of thanks for having the courage to post your feelings (and some very adorable pics).
ReplyDeleteThese drawings are nothing but fantasy -- though the paranoid guy in me wonders if some people in power can tell the difference between fantasy and reality.
I wish this half of the world would move on to a new boogeyman already.
I don't understand the constant confusion with muscle shota. People got real fussy about it on baraspot. I don't post when I visit there, but I could've said a lot if I wanted to. So I will here and now!
ReplyDeletePeople try to say it's chibi. That doesn't make sense, chibi isn't generally portrayed in a form where the characters are only a little bit smaller than usual unless it's literally the artist going out of their way to make the character younger anyway. The sprites during game-play are chibi though, and comparing that right there should be enough incentive for people to know the difference.
And even with the muscle shota image you referred to here, the boys are wearing school uniforms, obviously shota. Another thing people in the west seem to misconstrue is this made-up idea that shota are bound to a specified age of 13 and younger. If anything it can go up to 19(the maximum age of adolescence), and possibly more depending on the specifics. It's not all about age, but the neotenous features of the character. The characters in Sugar Shooter very well could be as old as 19 and they'd still count as muscle shota. If I had to guess I would say they're all younger than that, but there's no stated ages at this point anyway.
There doesn't need to be a problem with it. I think the thing is gay people are wrongly associated with pedophilia, and then of course there's the common misunderstanding that if you like shota you're into pedophilia, and neither is true.