While obviously not yet having been a writer (publicly) and/or poster (though I am a commissioner) I am pretty much not impacted by the changes in general.
However, being a furry/scalie as well as most of all a proponent of free-speech/expression and internet, it concerns us all.
First, though I will say that I can partially understand why people/sites are doing what they're doing (though on the record I'm more of a "live and let live"/ "if you don't like it don't look at it" kind of person). It wasn't so much about the art so much as the people that they were having issues with and while it could be fixed by requiring proof of age to join, most wouldn't then as anonymity is generally preferred.
The biggest problem the way I see it is the way that FA already said that they're handling it as well as how they would have preferred to (straight from the admin himself) that they're going to 'interpret' what underage is and is not.
For example, all spyro (shown as is of course) in any sexual situation whatsoever would have to go (and at one point they even considered/talked about trying to remove aged up spyro, since his 'cannon' age was younger).
Now onto the interpretation problem. Who decides what underage will be? Yes, there are those with obvious characteristics/age difference or specified ages like in tv shows, however what if you design your character/setting and they characteristics don't line up with societies opinions on what it should be? Banned. Size difference (and not going to lie, I have a pretty high interest in that ;) ) who's to say that one isn't 'too young' with that, even if both look older? Banned.
Using pokemon as an example you could have a level 100 munchlax and a level 1 snorlax (by breeding) and people would only want to ban it because of the munchlax
That's where the biggest problem...like what if people start taking all things to an extreme level? As another example there (and no one take this the wrong way, I'm a huge fan of lion king/lion guard stuff and have even commissioned one I have yet to post) one could argue that Disney was suggesting underage relationships which would clearly lead to sex/sexual situations...where? (SPOILER ALERT!) In the last season Kion becomes Rani's mate, so it's assumed then that they'll probably "do the deed" at some point. It seems fine since he's clearly older at that point. But wait, adult male lions have a full mane and he doesn't...therefore, he's underage... so the lion guard show should be banned! (that's sarcasm for those missing it lol) (SPOILER OVER)
Anyway, just my two cents (or two dollars worth for writing all that... again, I feel that if people don't like something, ignore it. Otherwise we'll eventually ban all content online, not just cub/teen.
Sorry for the long message and feel free to leave a comment on whether you agree or disagree (I'm open to debate as long as it stays civil/with facts, not anyone purposely calling anyone out or getting rude about things)
| Viewed: |
5 times |
| Added: |
3 years, 6 months ago
08 May 2021 07:27 CEST
|
|
|
