Welcome to Inkbunny...

To view member-only content, create an account. ( Hide )

welp i piss off newground

by Tstorms

this is what they sent me a few hours ago. because  of this pic https://inkbunny.net/s/2845808
yup  i see mommy ears.

(Newgrounds doesn't allow loli/shota art. Regardless of real, 3D or 2D, it's all the same to them. This isn't pixiv or gelbooru or twitter. Hell even paheal and twitter purges loli/shota content because of moralfags and sjw complaints nowadays that don't get the point of "Rule 34: if it exists, there is porn of it".

I don't know if you actually really are the artist of the art you post but I remember your art back in the day when I was a member of WWOEC back in the early/late 2000s. Do yourself a favor, don't post here and if you still want to, just don't post loli/shota art. This is an sjw cancel culture kind of place. You won't win any arguments here defending whether art isn't a real living breathing person that has feelings or not. Someone will report it, and it will be purged.)

if this guy remembers me from wwoec he must have spent a lot of time there.  and yes i cant win an argument when the lock down response and threads just to get the last word. weak sauce

Viewed:	44 times
Added:	1 year, 6 months ago 02 Nov 2022 18:06 CET

11 Comments on this Journal

Leave a Comment...

BaronFrogface

1 year, 6 months ago

link

Paheal only purges art that is either on the DNP list (excepting stuff like art commissioned by the uploader I guess), or which crosses a certain threshold of verisimilitude, or in other words looks too real to be CGI.

Also I wouldn't take loli/shota being disallowed on NG unless an actual moderator contacts you for takedown.or tells you that you're in violation. (Granted I hardly ever visit NG for art-related purposes, or at all anymore, so take it with a grain of salt) that said if what you're drawing is legal in your country then it should be fair game.

rwpikul

1 year, 6 months ago

link

@ BaronFrogface

How about NG's clearly posted rules:

"	Your art may not depict a sexually suggestive image of a child. This judgement is based on the image alone, regardless of whether you say the subject is 18+ in the comments. Lolicon and cub art fall under this category.

Tstorms

1 year, 6 months ago

link

@ rwpikul

yea but thats the issue i dont see a toon as anything but a toon saying that it is something that its not is just insane. i guess some cant distinguish fantasy from reality

rwpikul

1 year, 6 months ago

link

@ Tstorms

The reality is that hosting such art can result in social and legal problems.  Even 4chan, which had the posting of such art as one of the main reasons it even exists, didn't take too long before moot had to say "I would rather not go to jail."¹

Remember, for many people, the issue is that such content is being depicted at all, not that it is photographic/photo-realistic or not.  Also, it's a lot easier to police "nothing like this at all" than to play a game of "is this a render or a processed photograph?"

1: And seriously, _that_ is the #1 reason for sites to ban it.  Not some nebulous 'complainers' but the very real risk that some prosecutor will see it as an easy feather in their cap.

Tstorms

1 year, 6 months ago

link

@ rwpikul

i have not heard of anyone being jailed for having toon porn of any kind alone. if an individual is jailed its usually be caused they have real images or they were predators. when it comes to art the law is fuzzy. unless the laws have changed the last i check. it
only illegal if an image is created using an actual person.

rwpikul

1 year, 6 months ago

link

@ Tstorms

Counterexamples:

Gordon Chin (Canada)
Robul Hoque (UK)
Christian Bee (US)
Christopher Handley (US)

The law isn't as fuzzy as you might think. While state laws vary, at the federal level in the US there is a solid prohibition of such material which is either indistinguishable from an actual image of a minor or that is obscene. (Guess how easy it is to get a jury to say 'yep, that's obscene' when the subject is depicted as underage?)

And, of course, even if you don't go to jail these sorts of legal issues can still destroy your life.

Tstorms

1 year, 5 months ago

link

@ rwpikul

so sorry it took me so long to response to this, but real life and stuff

first off, send me the links to your Counterexamples, us only plz, so i can make a judgment. im pretty sure if these individuals were arrested and or charged, they had something more than toon porn on there hard drives. as for the federal law in the US that prohibition material which is either indistinguishable from an actual image of a minor, that was never in the debate. i think most of us understood this portion of the law. thats why when artist create material for this site and others like it they dont cross that line.
And im sure it is very easy to get a jury to say 'yep on many things. That dont mean that that person is guilty. And im not talking about ur Counterexamples, im talking about a person in general. Thats because Most jurys are led around by the nose via there emotions, and not the facts. the people in the jury dont really know the laws they dont try to understand these laws they dont even want to be there and the judge and prosecutor knows this. their goal is an easy conviction. That says alot about the u.s. justice system. If any of you end up on the receiving end of the u.s justice system make sure you have a good lawyer and not a public defender. It is good chance most convicted people had a public defender. A good lawyer will cut through all the bull shit

rwpikul

1 year, 5 months ago

link

@ Tstorms

And obviously not the ability to simply look up the cases.  I was specifically excluding cases, (such as Ted Shepherd, perhaps you've heard of him), where there were also photographic materials.

I note that you flat out ignore that it's indistinguishable _OR_ obscene.  Not and, _OR_.  That means if you can get a jury to rule it obscene, (which most are going to do simply based on the fact that it depicts a child), it's illegal at the federal level in the US.  What's more, the PROTECT Act removes the community standards prong of the Miller test from many of these cases, (ones involving sex, rather than just urination or defecation), leaving only the offensive depiction and artistic value prongs, (making conviction easier).

You also can't restrict this sort of thing to the US, many nations have telecommunications laws that are 'longarm' and apply to foreign servers who allow connections to the country in question.

And it doesn't matter how good their lawyer is:  A bankrupt site is still bankrupt, even a successful defence is going to be hellishly expensive and crippling on the income front.  Are you willing to fund Newgrounds defence and cover the impact of the backlash?

Tstorms

1 year, 5 months ago

link

@ rwpikul

I rather not waste  my time heading down the rabbit whole of false trails and  click bait. I rather waste
yours time. And sorry no, I never heard  Ted Shepherd.  And I still see you keep dropping names but no real facts.  I stand by what I said. Show me the case where some is convicted with just toon porn with no under underlying crime or evidence.

So by saying,  indistinguishable, do you mean  indistinguishable from the real thing. I dont know what you are thinking of but thats not toon or parody porn. You are thinking about  a more realistic style, maybe . But even so it will take a pretty poor eye that cant tell the difference between the two at a glance. However, if you just wanted something ruled obscene, all you need is a poor eye. And more over, stop calling it whats its not.  Can you provide any evidence that said image depicts a  person of questionable age . I ask you to prove that this is an actual person and not a toon. A toon is a creation of the artist nothing more.

And the PROTECT Act Is to Protect actual kids from online adult material use for commercial purposes. As for the Miller test involving these cases, (ones involving sex, rather than just urination or defecation), leaving only the offensive depiction and artistic value prongs, (making conviction easier). That was meant for any art consider to be obscene from any site including Newgrounds. Stop cherry picking articles. This debate has been going on since the late 70s. What is consider art and what is deemed obscene. The problem with laws  restricting what a person can and can not draw it steps on the toes of the  artist first amendment civil liberties.  And this is the reason why I said  in previous post that the laws are fuzzy at best,

Lastly sorry im not concerned with other countries laws just where im am.

rwpikul

1 year, 5 months ago

link

@ Tstorms

No false trails, no clickbait, I literally named four people who _HAVE_ gone to jail for drawn pornography.  (And seriously, you've been around the fandom for how long and you don't know who Ted Shepherd was?)  That you are too lazy to look up named cases is your problem, (especially given you are obviously just going to move the goalposts again).

Once again _THERE IS AN OR THERE!_ under current US federal law drawn porn does not need to be indistinguishable from photographic to be illegal, it just needs to be ruled obscene.  That law specifically uses a reduced version of the Miller test that removes the defence of "it's acceptable in the place it was exhibited/made".  Now, if you want to challenge that law, get out your chequebook and put your money where you mouth is rather than demanding other people sacrifice their hard work for your benefit.  (Oh, and a tip:  The justification for a law and what the law actually does are two different things.)

And since you missed it:  Sites like Newgrounds _CAN'T_ ignore foreign laws because they can find themselves on the receiving end of them, (either because people in those countries access the site or because citizens of those countries access it).