No Minors Rule for Artwork Forum - A question

[Celtic_Emperor]

*Please note that this is a repost also in the non-tickling images section. I only repost it so as to ensure it is being seen in the relevant forums*

* MODS, BEFORE YOU DELETE THIS, PLEASE AT LEAST READ IT AND RESPOND FOR CLARIFICATION. PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS NOT MEANT TO BE INTERPRETED AS AN ARGUMENT OR ACT OF DEFIANCE (its actually the opposite). I'm actually making a very good point which is very relevant and needs clarification from you *

I'll be able to continue to help in this area, since I'm aware of alot of the characters who are either popular or look over 18 but in actuality are underage. Many people keep their mouths shut knowing the mods aren't going to look into it, but you've got me at least and you can rest assured that I'll report it when I can.

I forsee alot of members moaning about this, as this now means alot of the popular anime characters are out and a good chunk of the material is now forbidden.

I will take this time however to ask a question for everyone's sake. It sort of falls in a grey area, as it is a technicality.

If the character in question is officially (and by officially I mean by creation of the creators) underage, but an artist or user submits a fanart picture of said character in the future, where they are physically drawn as 18 years of age or older, and this is specified as an accuracy, and not merely an excuse, will these pictures be obsolved from this rule?

This is a crucial question as alot of artists, myself included, draw characters as older than they are anyway, regardless of how old they are in the universe of the series they exist in. Some of us (at least me) don't do this in order to bypass rules on minors (ie- to be sneaky or to cheat), but rather because we would prefer drawing them that way whether it was tickling related or not.

In cases where these situations arise, what procedures does/will the staff take/suggest to the users in order to rectify this?

It would be wrong of the staff to assume the user and the repliers may be lying in order for the material to be posted, and likewise it wouldn't be fair for the users to make excuses.

The only loophole this presents is the "I drew her as over 18" comment. Its so easy to use, people already use it, the artist does not have to provide any explaination for style, and theres virtually no way, other than personal artistic taste, to determine whether they're lying to avoid trouble or shame and to subvert the rules, or, if they are actually telling the truth and it is merely the artist's style.

I'm assuming close calls will be determined on a case by case basis?

The biggest thing the staff of the TMF needs to understand about professional, mainstream manga/anime style artwork (of which the majority of material here consists of ) is that anime characters are usually underage but are drawn physically matured to a point that they would be mistaken as legal or mature.

That makes this a matter of posing, suggestive positions, sexual content, etc., as well as just a purely underage presense in a picture.

Perhaps, in order to further counter this problem, you might create additional rules that would apply to images that depict very youthful looking characters in compromising or sexual positions.

Since the whole emphasis is on cracking down on underage content, this makes sense, and it would allow for greater confidence in the choices you make on what stays and what goes, even if it is legal, either safety or barely legal.

This also becomes a matter of what is in good taste.

I'm sure we'd all appriciate a formal reply to this matter, in the contexts I've placed it.

Kindest regards,

Damien

 

[Mimi]

After discussing the points you've brought up with the entire staff of the TMF, we have decided that any character that is a minor is a violation. Aging the character to over the age of 18 will NOT be enough to make it acceptable for this forum. No minors will strictly mean no minors. No exceptions.

Thank you.

 

[Dave2112]

Exactly. What she ^ said.
l
l
l

There is plenty enough "inspiration" out there without having to resort to "ageing." Zero minors.

 

[Wolf]

Amen!

I have nothing against anime (although I'm not particularly a fan..on the one hand, they've done some ground-breaking movies that western society wouldn't dare...on the other hand, too many big-eyed, big-breasted 5th graders for my taste), but in this day and age, it's not enough to be on guard against anything improper. You have to be aware of anything that's even on the margins....and ulitmately, we have to police ourselves. Or, the mods do. 🙂



Wolf

(Still not cool enough for an idealized version of me in a siggy pic) 😉

 

[TicklishLurker]

You have to be aware of anything that's even on the margins....and ulitmately, we have to police ourselves. Or, the mods do. 🙂

You can say that again.

People keep trying to argue that "they're only cartoons" but they seem to be completely unaware of America's laws. I've said it before, I'll say it again, you can be required to register as a sex offender for just throwing out your Playboys where little kids can find them. Stephen King made the mistake of researching child porn/prositution/pedophila for a book without going through proper chanels, now he's a registered sex offender. So fictional or not, Sailor Moon, Mandy, Teen Titans, Kim Possible - they could all get us into big trouble. All it takes is one Pat Robertson wannabe following the link in Wikipedia reporting this site to the FBI.

I, for one, don't want to end up here.

I'm so glad the mods are stepping in!

 

[summerdaez]

Uh, not contradicting, because I totally agree with the no child rule (I've posted my dislike of it before).
But Jami...where did you get that Stephen King is a registered sex offender? Because he isn't. The Stephen King registered as a sex offender is a British man convicted of child sexual abuse. On March 18, 2004, King was sentenced to seven years in prison for the "systematic abuse" of three girls aged between 9 and 13 years old.
He most definitely is not Stephen King, the author.

 

[TicklishLurker]

He most definitely is not Stephen King, the author.

Either you're looking in the wrong place or his time is up. (Since he was researching they might've gone lighter on him but he did have to register because of the research.)

 

[TMF Jeff]

I'm going to cut this off before it goes any further. If you want to discuss sex offenders, stephen king, or anything other than the rules, do me a favor and open a seperate thread in Gen Dis.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

I would like to again restate that in asking these questions I am FOR, and not against, these new rules on the TMF. It is clear they are wanted and were the next logical step for TMF.

However, I do want to state something thats an unfair formality (not that you want to be unfair, it's just another formality attached). This situation has now opened a new can of worms.

By not allowing fanart of characters who are underage in the official works (something we cannot help or control as we did not make them or own them), you are effectively discounting any form of fanart associated with that character, past, present, or future.

As was stated, artists don't necessarily draw underagers "aged up" with the intent to evade rules (something I implied was a clear case that falls under the rules and is definitely punishable), but draw them as grow ups because they are in their fanfics, stories, and instances where emphasis is on the future, and not the present, of that character (ie- Asuka is 14 in Evangelion, but an artist wishes to draw her as 30 as this coincides with the fanfic or story behind the picture.She's 30, has a family with Shinji, etc, and by using our creative imagations, we have created futures for these characters that are only presumable, hypothetical, or unknown otherwise.)

Another example that more people would understand would be Clark Kent as a boy in the series, but a Superman fan wishing to draw Superman as an adult before this actually happens in the series (the point at which the pictures were drawn and uploaded, in this example, were the same times the character was still a boy)

In cases of anime, it is very often that we never see the future of these characters, what kind of people they would develop into, and what their story is after the sequence of events of the series.

This is good and bad. Its good because it allows people to use their imaginations and write fan stories (fanfics) where they create unofficial side stories, endings, and events (ie- he ends up with her instead of her, like in the series, and so on).

With this new rule you are, in a manner, telling us we cannot draw pictures of adult versions of the characters and whatever future they have beyond the age they are at currently, is irrelevant. This makes no sense, since they wouldn't be drawn at the current age, which appeases the rule, but not necessarily the moral fiber of this site (which is what the conversation boils down to- personal interpretation by the owner/moderators on a case by case basis).

While this new rule serves it's purpose of baring underage content and getting a firmer hold on it (a good thing), it unnecessarily bars fanart, to a degree, where no one has any freedom or artistic choices to the fanart they draw (not a good thing).

Again, anime/manga makes up a majority of the work here. To disallow it simply because the picture features an underager is one thing. Most people could agree with that. Its clear cut and isn't grey. It must go according to the rule. Disallowing it when the artist has avoided it completely by drawing the character in the future tense makes less sense.

Its like saying "if that character cannot exist here as a minor, they cannot exist here at any age" or "if that character was ever a child (which everyone is in a story at one point or another) then they cannot be uploaded".

Another example:

Anakin Skywalker in Star Wars.

Lets say I write a story about Anakin and Padme in some sort of tickling scenario. Now, I wouldn't actually do that, but its just an example. I did draw a picture once, prior to this rule, but understood my error and went along with it being removed understanding it as the moderators interpreted it and seeing the concern there.

Now, I agree that to either write it or draw it would fall under the new rule, as Anakin is underage at that point, especially if I do it more than once after clearly being told what can go and what cannot.

However, if I draw him or work the story where they are both of age, then its technically ok. But according to this new rule, it's not, in a sense, because his past contradicts the rule because I drew him as an adult at a point when he was but a child in the progress of the films.

For me to "skip" ahead in the years, in order to draw a far superior scenario (and one that would coincidentally appease the non-minor rule as well as completely make it a non-concern) makes sense and was the only option available, short of simply not drawing or writing it at all.

The new rule partially contradicts it however. The only reason it doesn't in this case of Star Wars is because we know that it's finished (the current saga) and so we know what we can choose from that is and is not out of bounds. If I had draw these pictures and/or wrote the stories at a point when Episode II and III were not released yet (and thereby Anakin was still a child, officially), and I drew him older, then technically I've broken this rule despite the fact I've drawn him as an adult, not a child.

It's almost like saying I'd have to WAIT to draw or write about him until Episode II and III came out if I wanted to post it here.

If you ask me, that is illogical and makes no sense at all. It stifles creativity and that will hurt contributions.

This example shows how your rule is partially flawed under certain circumstances which are guranteed to be a common occurance in many situations here (mostly in an anime/manga capacity). While this flaw is not your doing, it is present as an existing contradiction in both the manner in which it works, how it is applied and how it is resolved.

Non-tickling fanart is obsolved from this rule, I take it?

In cases where non-tickling work is lewd or in bad taste (ie- constitutes pornography as underage tickling may/would), I can see it too being removed, obviously.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

Hopefully my post has brought this back on topic. I'd hate to see this legitimate conversation about this new community rule be canned simply because of off-topic banter.

EDIT:

I would also like to point out that I did not actually create this thread. It was my response to the sticky created by Mimi about this matter, and it was removed then posted as a topic of it's own by a moderator.

I feel as though I should mention this, since I wouldn't want people to assume that I addressed the situation out of turn, out of place, or in a manner which would be inappropriate or seen as stirring the pot with/toward the intention of flaming, etc.

I would also like to stress that this is nothing more than a conversation we're having. No matter what you do or what you chose to make a rule, despite the conversation, is no less respectable.

That you're even allowing this conversation is proof enough to me of where your mind and heart is on the matter. 🙂

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

Sorry for the triple post, but its better this way than continuing to add to the larger post and just making it larger with edits (which I want to stop as this is easier for me and easier/faster for you to read, undoubtably).

To make another point, its only fair to note that your heart, conscience, and goal is in the right place.

It just unfortunately involves itself with another set of situations.

I think that its fair, the way the rule is, but is only truely fair if there are exceptions where the drawings are clearly in good taste, are NOT drawn to defy the rules, made to be excuses, and it's clear the artist, author or contributor intended it to not only be seen in a non-controversial light, but that they wished to also keep the grey area of children out of it, which they did by not drawing a child, but rather, that character as a grown up. ( I'm again, of course, talking about aged up characters).

Both sides clearly want the same things, at least from my perspective.

Although, maybe this is just my own ideal thinking. Its what I would do, not what everyone would do. I am well aware there are people here would intentionally draw underagers in tickling scenarios not only knowing they are underage, but draw and write about them BECAUSE they are (which addresses, on several levels, the need for action on your part, as it is a liability).

These people tend to stick out though. For me anyway, its really easy to tell the genuine people (like myself) from people just looking for a work-around. "She's 18 because I say I drew her as 18" isn't good enough, in my opinion. Theres no way to tell just because you added boobs, an ass, etc.

The best way of telling the truthfullness is in the story or theme behind the reason the character is older. It is usually out in the open and obvious when asked about.

If the artist simply has no explaination, wants none, or didn't think about it, then its easier to see how they would potentially fall into the group trying to sidestep the rules, in which cases, we may not be able to risk it.

Actually, this would encourage people to put substance into their pictures, like I do. Its not merely a "tickling picture". Theres some kind of nuance or reason (whether practical, realistic, or completely bizarre).

If it shows no creative merit in that way, then perhaps we may consider deleting it as theres no way to tell whether the artist was just lying.

On the other hand however, some people don't care about story, plot, or reason. They just want to see people getting tickled. This would impose perhaps unwanted extra effort on the artists and the viewers may not appriciate it. An artist should never be forced into anything anyway.

It's also possible that they lied about this also, and just made up some half-assed, insincere story in order to justify the picture. But again, the character is adult or adult-like, so even if their excuse doesn't float well, VISUALLY speaking, its technically not a child and so we're back to my original point.

See? Even my idea, while ideal, is flawed too, just like this new rule.

 

[Kenjisan]

Just want to comment. I'm not trying to get into a debate, but I'd like to say that, while I agree with this to a point, I think it unfairly lumps everything that includes a graphic representation of someone under the age of 18 into the catagory of child pornography. I think it's kind of insulting, frankly. I like to draw anime characters(and it's important to note that 99% of the characters in anime are what would be considered underage), and I know that many here do so as well, so this rule would probably kill a good half of the art posted here.

I'm not arguing for child pornography. I find it pretty despicable, actually. I just think that rather than an outright ban on everything, this rule should be reserved for things that are very obviously sexually explicit or involving sexual situations. For example, none of the anime art I've drawn(with the exception of one picture, that was an original character OVER 18) has been purposefully sexual in nature, and therefore, how can you say that the art that I draw isn't meant to be comedic, or having some other sort of merit?

Ultimately, it's the decision of the moderators at this site, but I just wanted to voice my protest at the scope of this decision. I think it's way too overly cautious and I think there are sites out there way more popular than this that go one hundred times father in terms of questionably illegal content.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

Just want to comment. I'm not trying to get into a debate, but I'd like to say that, while I agree with this to a point, I think it unfairly lumps everything that includes a graphic representation of someone under the age of 18 into the catagory of child pornography. I think it's kind of insulting, frankly. I like to draw anime characters(and it's important to note that 99% of the characters in anime are what would be considered underage), and I know that many here do so as well, so this rule would probably kill a good half of the art posted here.

I'm a little more cautious about the underage thing for this website only because this site is more concerned with it than comparible sites. I try and fix my concerns to the concerns of the site so that they are compatible at least and dialogue is possible. And what I see here, for this website, is a concern (perhaps a fear) where underage material is going to get this site closed down some day.

That you and I choose anime is our own fault. We know the truth, and as you and I and others admit, the japanese people revolve anime majorily around underagers and their adventures. Children, in Japan, are considered independant and of age much sooner than we westerners feel they are. For them that age is about 14, for us it is 16. So we round it off to 18 and they round it off to 16.

While we can do nothing to stop this, we do have the choice, in our fanart and in our original creations, to change this, avoid this, and simply make it not an issue by not allowing the facts to interfere with our work and drawing style ( I like drawing more adult, mature characters anyway).

In the case of fanart, drawing older versions of the characters should be allowable, otherwise, like you are saying and agreeing, it would kill many contributions. I think it's illogical that we wouldn't be able to draw a character tickled in the future. Are we supposed to pretend they are underage forever and never bother with them on this site? That eliminates a majority of the characters people draw, which is why aging it up is necessary if you still want those characters.

However, in cases where you make no effort to make sure the character you've drawn is not a liability to this site probably should be deleted, and I can understand why.

I'm not arguing for child pornography. I find it pretty despicable, actually. I just think that rather than an outright ban on everything, this rule should be reserved for things that are very obviously sexually explicit or involving sexual situations. For example, none of the anime art I've drawn(with the exception of one picture, that was an original character OVER 18) has been purposefully sexual in nature, and therefore, how can you say that the art that I draw isn't meant to be comedic, or having some other sort of merit?

Of course you're not arguing for child pornography. None of us are. We all have that much in common, at least.

I do agree, as was my point, that this rule strangles fanart or any drawing where we cannot help that the character is underage, so we draw them as adults. Why is drawing them older, and in the future a problem? Why are we confined to what they are now (and may always be if a series doesn't follow through the life of a character, which, as I've stated before, most do not).

However, I disagree with you in that you'd want to continue to draw underagers. Why can't the artists here just learn to draw older characters? That would solve a huge part of the problem.

Don't you see that the problem is being percieved that we enjoy drawing underagers, submitting this material, and then create a risk that way?

Why can't our artists just learn to avoid drawing underagers tickled, or simply draw them as adults? If they are fixated on drawing them because they are underagers, then theres your lewdness factor right there. If they don't want to do this, then they're adding to the problem and are lazy. If you can enjoy the character as a minor, what would change so drastically that you couldn't enjoy them as an adult? Is their innocence lost? Their personality changed? The character is still the character, and should be as enjoyable to have and draw as an adult? Theres more possibilities with an adult character anyway, and I'm not refering to anything sexual. An adult naturally has more options. A child is limited in what you can do with them, to a degree. An adult also has the benefit of being rightfully sexy or seductive. No one would question that.

The problem the japanese way of thinking in anime is that it has already mentally conditioned american artists to draw younger and younger characters. We have the power to avoid that.

While I agree, in your example, that your pictures were fine, we have to look beyond that, to what the moderators are ultimately concerned with- the vitality of this website.

Ultimately, it's the discission of the moderators at this site, but I just wanted to voice my protest at this decision. I think it's way too overly cautious and I think there are sites(which will remain nameless) out there way more popular than this that go one hundred times father in terms of questionably illegal content.

Yeah, as I stated above, we're obliged to obey this new rule. If our artists don't like it they can leave.

On the other hand however, if the mods do nothing to rectify this problem or iron out the rule and make it more forgiving, or, alternatively, take my posts and use them as a template with which to make exceptions to the rule, then they have lost a good chunk of the material here.

Not that our artists would walk out or anything, but by telling them what is acceptable to upload limits their options in the anime field short of being forced to draw older characters and avoid the underagers or simply choose another genre to draw other than anime (which may be difficult for most).

I think we need to meet eachother half way, the mods and the artists.

They need to allow more slack and consider the alternatives I/we've presented, and we need to work harder with them to find and eliminate clear cases of child pornography and not let it slide to help our fellow artists out. Its that unspoken protection that we afford eachother thats a part of the problem. We know the characters are underage, but we say nothing knowing the mods want this material reported. We need to be a part of the solution, and they need to work with us.

As you say, this situation is not nearly as dire as its being made to look, especially when, as you say, larger communities get away with a hell of a lot more.

That they do is no excuse however for what we should do. This site clearly runs itself on some level of a moral fiber (despite the fact ii is an adult fetish website), and I for one appriciate and respect that (its also one of the reasons I stay and help with reporting posts and pictures when I can). But, as an artist, this rule, as it stands, doesn't help us do what we do and it doesn't encourage us.

Though seemingly clear-cut and simple, this rule implies and imposes far more than perhaps was intended.

 

[Kenjisan]

I don't have any problem drawing characters older. What gets me is how ridiculous it all seems. I think the core of this ridiculousness is because we're drawing cartoon characters, and thus, so much can be open to ones interpretation.

I think the rule should be that as long as the character looks* like an adult there should be no problem. The child pornography laws state that you can have no visual depiction of a minor involved in anything deemed to be sexual.
My characters don't look like minors right? So where's the problem?

I didn't have any such thoughts of a characters age when I drew them, because they look* like adults and in my mind thats fine. Since it's a cartoon and not a real person, can I now make my art acceptable by saying they're all over the age of 18? You (not you specifically, Emp) can't tell me otherwise, because I drew the picture.

Do you see where I'm coming from about how ridiculous this gets?
Its not about common ground with the mods. Its about reason and common sense. I understand the law, but the law isn't gonna crackdown on a site that allows pictures of cartoon characters to get tickled in a non-sexual manner.


But, if it makes it somehow more socially acceptable:

The characters that I, Kenjisan, draw, whom all look like adults, are now presumed to be over the legal cartoon age of 18 years. So shall it be from this day forth!

A silly response to a silly situation.

Does this make it better?

PS: No hard feelings or anything toward you, Emp. I appreciate your attempts to appease both our masters and artisans. I just feel like there should be some reason in this decision.

I hope the mods are reading this.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

I don't have any problem drawing characters older. What gets me is how ridiculous it all seems. I think the core of this ridiculousness is because we're drawing cartoon characters, and thus, so much can be open to ones interpretation.

Agreed.

I think the rule should be that as long as the character looks* like an adult there should be no problem. The child pornography laws state that you can have no visual depiction of a minor involved in anything deemed to be sexual.
My characters don't look like minors right? So where's the problem?

The problem is in misinterpretations on the part of the law. While the staff and owner may want to give you the benefit of the doubt, they most likely realize that if found, they feel this material would be more reportable than material featuring older characters whom appeared older and not merely youthful but old enough.

To answer your question, they can be percieved as minors whether they actually are or are not. So its all the same. Thats the problem. Its perception, not reality. Is that unfortunate? Yes, of course it is.

I didn't have any such thoughts of a characters age when I drew them, because they look* like adults and in my mind thats fine. Since it's a cartoon and not a real person, can I now make my art acceptable by saying they're all over the age of 18? You (not you specifically, Emp) can't tell me otherwise, because I drew the picture.

There is your error. In YOUR mind they were adults and that was FINE. That statement (whether you intended it this way or not) implies that you don't care whether or not they actually are underage only that something lewd is happening, which makes that a secondary issue to the tickling of an underager, which is the primary focus of this new rule.

While an artist has every right to draw and create a character at whatever age they want, for all intents and purposes, you'd either need to prove (with fanart) that the character is 18 or over (in the suggested form of themes, stories, or past pictures) or you would need to draw them in the future as opposed to the present, when they're underage. This is easily done, yet the rule contradicts this and stops it from happening, which is what my concern is.

Do you see where I'm coming from about how ridiculous this gets?
Its not about common ground with the mods. Its about reason and common sense. I understand the law, but the law isn't gonna crackdown on a site that allows pictures of cartoon characters to get tickled in a non-sexual manner.

Of course I see where you're coming from with this. I'm an artist too, you know. However, I know when to hold 'em and when to fold 'em. I could draw whatever I want, but sharing it here would be another matter. Thats something that the rest of the artists need to accept ASAP.

It is about common ground with the moderators, as they are the ones, despite what the law says, that allow or disallow these uploads. They have the option of taking the risk and it turning out fine. They are opting not to do that, at the moment, which we can try and reason with, but not expect to change.

Also, what is non-sexual is a matter of opinion too. Many could be turned on by innocent tickling rather than perverse, or sexual tickling. Everyone presumably has their "on" button as far as this is concerned. That this is true for cartoons, things that, as you say, are not real, shows the severity of the attachment and need for this material. Thereby, it is taken seriously enough by enough people, that it takes on some sexual undertones regardless of what the artist may have intended or personally put into it.

Why is it this way? Because this is a fetish website where people most likely get off on and enjoy this sort of thing. It is because of this adult environment and atmosphere that special care must be taken in regards to underagers, fictional or otherwise.

If this was not a fetish website, and something more maintream, this issue would be either minuscule or not present at all.

Part of the package of being on an adult website is realizing there is a necessity for a heightened sense of awareness in what is proper and legal. The owner and his people are doing what they do to save this site.

But, if it makes it somehow more socially acceptable:

The characters that I, Kenjisan, draw, whom all look like adults, are now presumed to be over the legal cartoon age of 18 years. So shall it be from this day forth!

Does this make it better?

No, that does not make it better as they don't look like adults. They look like kids drawn with adult proportions rather than adults drawn with some remnants of child-like attributes. I know this frustrates you, but its because of anime. The style is to blame and the order is. In anime, more emphasis is put on being younger but mature, rather than older, but youthful still.

So, take this as a challenge to overcome the stereotype and make something of your style that is not typical and something people will honestly agree with when you make a declaration like you did above.

Otherwise, its pointless to say it, as when people look at an anime piece, its either going to look like a child or young teen, or its not. If people say its not possible to draw a character that is both legal but mature looking, then they don't know what they're talking about. It most definitely is possible, and its all a part of perfecting your own styles and techniques.

Until then, the best thing we can suggest to the moderators is that they make exceptions in some cases or allow us to age the characters or allow us to create further fictional timelines in which the character is tickled much later in life or at a comfortable age.

PS: No hard feelings or anything toward you, Emp. I appreciate your attempts to appease both our masters and artisans. I just feel like there should be some reason in this decision.

I hope the mods are reading this.

There are, of course, no hard feelings. You're being a gentleman and I appriciate that.

I already understand the reasoning behind it, however, without them even having to explain it. What I would want to see is them address the matter as presented, rather than discuss it amongst themselves.

An open dialogue is ideal here, and as they've allowed it, I'm sure they are reading this. So, rest assured to that. They're the ones that made it a thread, not me. It could have been left as a reply to the sticky, but they opted to make it a discussion. That shows they have some interest in our feedback, and as long as we're all at the table, its better we get this all out now than in little spurts of whining and complaining in the future when pictures are deleted and people are wondering why and complaining.

I sure hope everyone reading this realizes that the entire structure of the tickling artwork forum stands to be forever altered by this decision. Now is the time to state your mind as you may never have another chance to again once this matter is sealed and closed.

 

[Kenjisan]

No, that does not make it better as they don't look like adults. They look like kids drawn with adult proportions rather than adults drawn with some remnants of child-like attributes. I know this frustrates you, but its because of anime. The style is to blame and the order is. In anime, more emphasis is put on being younger but mature, rather than older, but youthful still.

A style with big eyes does not automatically equate to a little kid. I'd like to use legitimate vendors of hentai anime as an example. They can sell their smut by listing a disclaimer declaring the characters in whatever they're selling are over the age of 18. Legally, thus far, that disclaimer is good enough to keep them from prosecution. I know that not all the characters in the crap they sell were originally 18 but they all have the proportions of an adult female, and that should be enough. Thus far, it seems to be working.

A visual representation of a minor is going to look obviously look like a minor, meaning, having childlike proportions or made to looklike a child through clothing or some other means.

If I draw a character with adult proportions, and claim that it is an adult, then the burden is on the people trying to prove that it is child pornography and on that note, any cartoon image can be suspect. I can say that that Stipplewitz character is 16 and constitutes child pornography, but I have to prove it.

Here's the bulk of the law, just for reference:

Title 18 of the United States Code governs child pornography. See Chapter 110, Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children. 18 U.S.C. § 2256 defines "Child pornography" as:

"any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where -
(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(B) such visual depiction is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
(D) such visual depiction is advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression that the material is or contains a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct . . ."


This TMF rule was obviously implemented to keep potential legal action away, so my proposal is this: as long as picture is not obviously sexually explicit, does not obviously contain a child, and has some sort of disclaimer, there should be no problems. Questionable pictures will be dealt with, no doubt, but if a picture does not fit into this loose definition of child pornography, then where's the issue?

I just want to reiterrate: there are popular art sites out there that post what would be considered child pornography on a daily basis. These sites are a thousand times more likely to be potentially prosecuted than this site. In addition, if this site was ever scrutinized, it would almost undoubtedly be for something on this site other than the artwork.

I sure hope everyone reading this realizes that the entire structure of the tickling artwork forum stands to be forever altered by this decision. Now is the time to state your mind as you may never have another chance to again once this matter is sealed and closed.

Seems like the mods have already made their decision. If they want to stand firm on it, I can list about 12 threads on the main artwork page that are banned under the new rules. I'm sure we can bend this flexible child porno law to include some of the real life images on this site too. 🙄

 

[Kenjisan]

I want to apologise to MTP Jeff in advance, but for the sake of this discussion, I just want to add: There has been, in recent years, only one reported case of somebody getting arrested for possesion of cartoon child porno. This guy was downloading the stuff in a public library and in addition, he had tenfold the amount of reallife child porn on his home computer. He also lived in Canada!

The federal government has better things to spend their money on than busting a tickling website for hosting cartoons of people getting tickled, and it probably won't until the country faithfully represents George Orwell's wonderful vision of a utopian society.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

A style with big eyes does not automatically equate to a little kid.

And your assuming that one would use the eyes as the only means of deciding this. Anime characters have youthfully deceptive appearances, so its important, in regards to this matter.

I'd like to use legitimate vendors of hentai anime as an example. They can sell their smut by listing a disclaimer declaring the characters in whatever they're selling are over the age of 18. Legally, thus far, that disclaimer is good enough to keep them from prosecution. I know that not all the characters in the crap they sell were originally 18 but they all have the proportions of an adult female, and that should be enough. Thus far, it seems to be working.

A visual representation of a minor is going to look obviously look like a minor, meaning, having childlike proportions or made to looklike a child through clothing or some other means.

If I draw a character with adult proportions, and claim that it is an adult, then the burden is on the people trying to prove that it is child pornography and on that note, any cartoon image can be suspect. I can say that that Stipplewitz character is 16 and constitutes child pornography, but I have to prove it.

Here's the bulk of the law, just for reference:

Title 18 of the United States Code governs child pornography. See Chapter 110, Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children. 18 U.S.C. § 2256 defines "Child pornography" as:

"any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where -
(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(B) such visual depiction is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
(D) such visual depiction is advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression that the material is or contains a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct . . ."

"(B) such visual depiction is, or appears to be, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit condict"

"Appears to be" is in the eye of the beholder, and the eye that matters more here are the eyes of the moderators.

"Sexually explicit" is not limited to general pornography. One could easily say tickling is a form of pornography under certain points of view, and that if a character that "appears to be" underage is in such a situation that "appears to be" sexually explicit, then its reason enough to be wary of this material.

A majority of the art posted here contains anime characters that LOOK or "appear to be" more childish than adult. Because the basic style lacks attributes that define age to a definite degree and many of the characters have kiddie faces, (whether they have boobs or not) they "appear to be" underage.

"(D) such visual depiction is advertised, promoted, presented, described, or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression that the material is or contains a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct ..."

The way this matter is being dealt with stinks of evasion, and the way artists let underagers slide and don't report it when they've been asked to in the past is stealthy. It implies a sense of shady-doings (whether shady or not) in an attempt to make the likihood of the material being deleted less likely. While the artists will defend the work, if the law were here to witness this, they may take action.

Fortunately, the law is not here to witness this. We do have moderators however to make the law unnecessary here as we can deal with it ourselves.

This TMF rule was obviously implemented to keep potential legal action away, so my proposal is this: as long as picture is not obviously sexually explicit, does not obviously contain a child, and has some sort of disclaimer, there should be no problems. Questionable pictures will be dealt with, no doubt, but if a picture does not fit into this loose definition of child pornography, then where's the issue?

That is ideal. However, the rule is already here now, and it is not ideal. What you are suggesting is really no different than what I'm saying to you and said before you said anything. So, we're on the same page.

I disagree on the defintion of pornography being loose however. Thats really a matter of opinion designed to be tailored to how someone feels about where they are and why. I could point at anything here and call it pornography. Am I wrong if this material is created to arrouse others or it does arrouse them? Technically, no. So then, this is a pornographic website where people come to get pornography. Many of you avoid saying that word because you hate the idea of being called either pornographers or people who are into pornography. It makes you feel dirty. It's not becoming of the reputations many of you have, so you simply do not use the definition or apply it to what you do.

But, from a certain point of view, the whole premise of this site could be called pornographic.

The issue then is in where the tolerance level is set at. If all the rest of the "pornography" is legally ok, and we have an instance where it may not be, then its only natural that an adult website would want to crack down on that so as to ensure it lives to sex-up another day. 😉

I just want to reiterrate: there are popular art sites out there that post what would be considered child pornography on a daily basis. These sites are a thousand times more likely to be potentially prosecuted than this site. In addition, if this site was ever scrutinized, it would almost undoubtedly be for something on this site other than the artwork.

You can reiterrate all you want. It doesn't change the fact that those sites are those sites with their own standards and situations, and this is the TMF. Whether we can get away with it or whatever is beside the point, really.

I do agree however that, compared to these other sites, the TMF is in relatively safe waters.

Seems like the mods have already made their decision. If they want to stand firm on it, I can list about 12 threads on the main artwork page that are banned under the new rules. I'm sure we can bend this flexible child porno law to include some of the real life images on this site too. 🙄

Anyone that saw Mimi's response obviously sees that they have, though only two moderators have said anything.

As for your pointing out these threads, feel free. I just hope it doesn't become some flame or riot.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

I want to apologise to MTP Jeff in advance, but for the sake of this discussion, I just want to add: There has been, in recent years, only one reported case of somebody getting arrested for possesion of cartoon child porno. This guy was downloading the stuff in a public library and in addition, he had tenfold the amount of reallife child porn on his home computer. He also lived in Canada!

The federal government has better things to spend their money on than busting a tickling website for hosting cartoons of people getting tickled, and it probably won't until the country faithfully represents George Orwell's wonderful vision of a utopian society.

This is true, but if the owner and moderators completely agreed with that sentiment, this rule would not have gone into effect so quickly. Your best bet is to hope this can be altered or undone.

Fortunately, I'm in a position on this website where either way it doesn't effect me. Its a matter of them changing the rule or you adapting to it. Its pretty simple, actually.

 

[Kenjisan]

This is true, but if the owner and moderators completely agreed with that sentiment, this rule would not have gone into effect so quickly. Your best bet is to hope this can be altered or undone.

Fortunately, I'm in a position on this website where either way it doesn't effect me. Its a matter of them changing the rule or you adapting to it. Its pretty simple, actually.

I don't care about adapting to it. Their loss. It's really just the ridiculousness of it all that bothers me. The bottom line is: there is no safe pornography. It's a social taboo in mainstream America. The mods are implimenting this like it's going to make a difference somehow. TMF is not an active peddler of child porno, and the chances of anything in the way of legal issues ever happening is slim.

I don't mean to start a flame war, but if the mods are persistant in this witch hunt, how about we ban those popular mainstream image threads in the image gallery? There is tickling in the pictures, which to some at this site could be interpretted in a sexual manner, and I'm pretty damn sure some of those people are under 18. Yep. Under the child pornography law, that could constitute child porno. For 90 percent of the images in those threads in is likely unknown who or how old the people depicted are, but they could get this site into legal trouble.

The mods allow these image threads because they trust that the posters will not post images of underage people, which is nearly impossible. But if I post a drawing that I have made of a character that has adult proportions, and I say is an adult, that is not acceptable?

Mods: Don't go to extremes unless you're willing to do so for the whole site.


Still waiting for another mod response.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

I don't care about adapting to it. Their loss. It's really just the ridiculousness of it all that bothers me. The bottom line is: there is no safe pornography. It's a social taboo in mainstream America. The mods are implimenting this like it's going to make a difference somehow. TMF is not an active peddler of child porno, and the chances of anything in the way of legal issues ever happening is slim.

I don't mean to start a flame war, but if the mods are persistant in this witch hunt, how about we ban those popular mainstream image threads in the image gallery? There is tickling in the pictures, which to some at this site could be interpretted in a sexual manner, and I'm pretty damn sure some of those people are under 18. Yep. Under the child pornography law, that could constitute child porno. For 90 percent of the images in those threads in is likely unknown who or how old the people depicted are, but they could get this site into legal trouble.

The mods allow these image threads because they trust that the posters will not post images of underage people, which is nearly impossible. But if I post a drawing that I have made of a character that has adult proportions, and I say is an adult, that is not acceptable?

Mods: Don't go to extremes unless you're willing to do so for the whole site.


Still waiting for another mod response.

I don't think anyone needs to be goading anyone else, here. LOL

 

[Kenjisan]

I don't think anyone needs to be goading anyone else, here. LOL

I'm simply trying to prove a point. I think what they've proposed is unfair. Is it really gonna effect me? No, but since the mods feel like it's a big issue, shouldn't they go after other stuff as well or are there going to be double standards?

What you and I seem to mutually agree on sounds fair and, if properly obeyed, relatively within the law. The mods(Mimi's) decision sounds firm. I'd like to see if our points have been considered.

I've said what I've intended to, and will refrain from anything further until a we get a mod response.

 

[Celtic_Emperor]

I'm simply trying to prove a point. I think what they've proposed is unfair. Is it really gonna effect me? No, but since the mods feel like it's a big issue, shouldn't they go after other stuff as well or are there going to be double standards?

What you and I seem to mutually agree on sounds fair and, if properly obeyed, relatively within the law. The mods(Mimi's) decision sounds firm. I'd like to see if our points have been considered.

I've said what I've intended to, and will refrain from anything further until a we get a mod response.

The only thing I find remotely odd about this is that they've selected Mimi to be the one to break the news, rather than one of the three artwork forum moderators who would normally attend to it. A trivality, I'm sure.

You just need to be patient. You'll be addressed in due time. Afterall, whats the rush? This situation will be waiting for you when you get back, I'm sure.

 

[Myriads]

Celtic_Emperor said: many words...

Let me clarify.

Images of charaters who are under the age of 18 in the material they come from will not be allowed.

Images of charaters who are under the age of 18 in the material they came from, but have been 'aged' by the artist will not be allowed.

Period.

No kinda sortas. No 'but it's tradition'.

Do not post material that is based on a minor character.

Myriads

 

[Myriads]

I don't mean to start a flame war, but if the mods are persistant in this witch hunt, how about we ban those popular mainstream image threads in the image gallery? There is tickling in the pictures, which to some at this site could be interpretted in a sexual manner, and I'm pretty damn sure some of those people are under 18. Yep. Under the child pornography law, that could constitute child porno. For 90 percent of the images in those threads in is likely unknown who or how old the people depicted are, but they could get this site into legal trouble.

The mods allow these image threads because they trust that the posters will not post images of underage people, which is nearly impossible. But if I post a drawing that I have made of a character that has adult proportions, and I say is an adult, that is not acceptable?

Mods: Don't go to extremes unless you're willing to do so for the whole site.



We review mainstream image posts on a regular basis, and remove all links or threads that have minors in them. If they are reported we find them faster. Just today we spent a good hour+ verifying the ages of a group of females in a linked post. Members who make regular posts are well aware fo our rules and we've spoken to them abotu stayign in them.

The story forums live under the same rules.

In fact, all of the forum live under these rules. For example, the record length 'early experiences' thread died to these rules.

Once again I'll speak to the reasons for these rules.

We exist in a climate where trivial issues can be turned into reasons that will quickly end the forum if we allow them to. More then once I've dealt with an upset parent becuase their kid came here after googling something and finding the forum and lots of adult stuff along with the picture of Misty, or such. Happily all the parents have been level headed and have not done more then talk to me about the issue. But all I need is that one zealot to land a lawsuit on us for corrupting their kid and we are done.

Is it stupid? Yes. Very. But it's the world I have to manage the place in.

If you see a post with underage material in it report it.

Myriads