Okay, you want it to go this way, sure, I don't even have to leave the website to bring back receipts. Remember, decades here, and it's not pretty. Yes, you're still as mealy-mouthed as ever in the "I didn't say child molestation isn't bad, I just said everything around it is okay, up to and including watching real child pornography." If there's a compromise, more nuanced position here, it's "Rakuen, honey, making the 'failure to distinguish between reality and fiction' argument doesn't work when you do it because you have advocated for the real version of child pornography and not just the fictional variety in the past."
You also don't seem to have any problem advocating for bestiality (and, uh, kind of an odd little moment in the article comments I linked to, but you seemed pretty okay with necrophilia there, too? I don't know, that was probably just an odd moment in a heated debate, on both sides, but it still has the same basic underlying issue of consent.), I mean, sure I can get receipts on that one, too, if you want, but I actually don't think you'll have much problem with my claims there, but, anyway, the point is, you've got a pattern, and it's actually more consistent than your free speech advocacy (which, while strongly defended in words, yes, in practice you've definitely seemed to pick and choose your moments, and, yes, receipts on this one, because, Jesus Christ, you even got Green Reaper a little snippy at you). Like I've said in the past, I don't think you're a pedophile, or a dogfucker, for that matter, because I just don't think you'd be able to keep that a secret for a decade+ (au contrere, I think you'd happily spill the beans instantly), but you definitely have some kind of bug up your butt about "consent". Like, you're smart enough to know you better say "child molestation is bad", but honestly, there's something that rubs you the wrong way about it, isn't there? You don't advocate for these sort of things because, if you had the option, you wouldn't do them, but not having the option drives you nuts.
And, Rakuen, I'm being nice. Most people do think you're just a dogfucking kiddy diddler, and that you're lying through your teeth about thinking these things are bad.
Well, anyway, since I linked to the Mizzyam case, in which a cub artist was arrested for real child pornography, I would like to rebut the "a failure to distinguish between fictional and real content" slogan by saying that's dismissive of the link between fictional and real content.
But, actually, in real terms, I'm kind of two very different minds about this e621 thing; yes, on one hand, it very clearly is censorship, but in a sideways sort of way, because, correct me if I'm wrong, most "submissions" to e621 aren't actually posted by the original artist, so unlike culls of cub porn on other furry sites, this is not a culling of an artists' primary (or even often secondary) market, and it's not even a cub porn cull, it's mostly not even furry, which begs the question why was it even there to begin with on grounds of "audience expectations" rather than "morality". I'm assuming a lot of "anime catgirl" ears-and-tails-and-maybe-paws were culled, but it also seems like a lot of what was removed wasn't appropriate for a furry site to begin with.
Okay, you want it to go this way, sure, I don't even have to leave the website to bring back receipts. Remember, decades here, and it's not pretty. Yes, you're still as mealy-mouthed as ever in the "I didn't say child molestation isn't bad, I just said everything around it is okay, up to and including watching real child pornography." If there's a compromise, more nuanced position here, it's "Rakuen, honey, making the 'failure to distinguish between reality and fiction' argument doesn't work when you do it because you have advocated for the real version of child pornography and not just the fictional variety in the past."
You also don't seem to have any problem advocating for bestiality (and, uh, kind of an odd little moment in the article comments I linked to, but you seemed pretty okay with necrophilia there, too? I don't know, that was probably just an odd moment in a heated debate, on both sides, but it still has the same basic underlying issue of consent.), I mean, sure I can get receipts on that one, too, if you want, but I actually don't think you'll have much problem with my claims there, but, anyway, the point is, you've got a pattern, and it's actually more consistent than your free speech advocacy (which, while strongly defended in words, yes, in practice you've definitely seemed to pick and choose your moments, and, yes, receipts on this one, because, Jesus Christ, you even got Green Reaper a little snippy at you). Like I've said in the past, I don't think you're a pedophile, or a dogfucker, for that matter, because I just don't think you'd be able to keep that a secret for a decade+ (au contrere, I think you'd happily spill the beans instantly), but you definitely have some kind of bug up your butt about "consent". Like, you're smart enough to know you better say "child molestation is bad", but honestly, there's something that rubs you the wrong way about it, isn't there? You don't advocate for these sort of things because, if you had the option, you wouldn't do them, but not having the option drives you nuts.
And, Rakuen, I'm being nice. Most people do think you're just a dogfucking kiddy diddler, and that you're lying through your teeth about thinking these things are bad.
Well, anyway, since I linked to the Mizzyam case, in which a cub artist was arrested for real child pornography, I would like to rebut the "a failure to distinguish between fictional and real content" slogan by saying that's dismissive of the link between fictional and real content.
But, actually, in real terms, I'm kind of two very different minds about this e621 thing; yes, on one hand, it very clearly is censorship, but in a sideways sort of way, because, correct me if I'm wrong, most "submissions" to e621 aren't actually posted by the original artist, so unlike culls of cub porn on other furry sites, this is not a culling of an artists' primary (or even often secondary) market, and it's not even a cub porn cull, it's mostly not even furry, which begs the question why was it even there to begin with on grounds of "audience expectations" rather than "morality". I'm assuming a lot of "anime catgirl" ears-and-tails-and-maybe-paws were culled, but it also seems like a lot of what was removed wasn't appropriate for a furry site to begin with.