WARNING: This isn't a place meant to be read for minors. If you are a minor, do not read. I do not know if it's too much, but I put this warning here anyway.
It seems a bunch of weirdos on Twitter (and also Reddit) has been freaking out about something that I don't think by law (though, I could be wrong) is considered pornography. It seems a lot of people has this extreme view of "weird kinks" or "weird fetishes" that they seem to believe that if there is even a tiniest awareness of existence of such a thing, they think the entire thing is sexual in the same way as showing sexual nudity of a person. Maybe I'm thinking too much but it's kinda similar to the argument that if someone said that gay people exist to kids, then it's the same thing as showing sexual content to children.
About some time ago, someone on the Splatoon 3 Plaza (a video game hub where it's possible to upload a message through online communication features) has decided to draw a picture of borderline 'vore' with a slight suggestion of getting inside a large mouth, with a heart, which as a whole suggest the person does have a bit of a kink interest into such thing. After that, thousands of reactions stirred on Twitter screaming against the artist because the person was apparently uploading a "kink" or a "fetish" to a "kids game" (magic words to raise moral panic), even though the person was just, what I believe to be, was following the same guidelines a lot of kids focused media has often done.
In many under 18 media, there has always been suggestive lewdness and romance styles for the purpose of making a character look more 'attractive', with the open mind of having some people 'enjoy' it or be inspired by it for same reason. We have had for example, the Blades from Xenoblade Chronicles 2, which were suggestively designed. There has been a lot of PG media that had romance that was used in a way to make a character seem more "beautiful", one Disney remake suggested a grrr kink reference, there were even suspicious happy references even a certain fetish for a rated E game (the infamous unnecessary feet scene from Paper Mario - The Thousand-Year Door), there was a literal blatant inappropriate scene involving a women's bottom in Dexter's Laboratory, a show aimed at even young kids, and there was a lot more 'happy' references in favor of the same perverted brain. And I'm not exactly trying to talk about jokes, even though it could be argued that jokes are no better or worse, I am talking about, assuming that's what they do, people trying to make a character look, positively, 'sexier' or 'sexy'.
There has never been a known widely accepted system that agrees that the intention behind a picture is what dictates certain pictures as a whole just because of intention, as it's usually more depending on what it is if I am assuming right. A "kink", if I'm thinking of the word right, is not even itself sexual, but rather an enchanting tool that can rise arousing ideas to a living being, and the main problem with these people is that they confuse it with the actual sex or perverted nudity, and they use such a label to describe something that isn't any different, in terms of nature, to what many kid medias has often done, somehow extreme.
So much of these people are hypocrites, as they seem to forget the fact that a "kink" or more likely, a "style" of preferring someone is just a suggestive way of preferring someone, just like showing suggestive curves and large breasts which happened in many under 18 medias. Not only that, but there seems to be hypocrisy even for fans of the same Splatoon 3 game, here it is:
 |
| Note: Wasn't nudity but still wanted to censor the 'perverted' parts. The top was more of a mouth, but censored in case of umm, policy, and will it work? IDK. |
This clearly exposes the hypocrisy problem with these strange puritan freaks. The problem is that they are enforcing a completely made up moral mindset, that doesn't fit with standard censorship, against people doing stuff that is arguably no different than what a lot of even average people are doing. This right here, is mainly why I had a problem with the backlash. Another reason why I have a problem is the idea of canceling those for not following the weird less cultured morality mindset that seemed made up, and finally the last reason is that this is such a dangerous argument.
A lot of people seem to have this extreme view to the label "kink" ("fetish" has sometimes been included too) that they seem to think that a "fetish" or a "kink" is somehow a magically different thing that declares same exact nature levels as being much worse just because of the word "kink" behind it. In reality, using a "kink" in a slight suggestive reference way is exactly no different than using a common "non-kink" suggestive style to suggest arousing the same sex part of the brain, in the same way. I start to wonder how dangerous this argument could get? If someone was attracted to a furry character and was the only reason for the existence of the character, is it always pornographic to show to a general audience? Also is showing romance for the character itself kinky now because it's 'kinky' to find an anthro character attractive? I've heard that preferring a character giant for attraction reasons is itself a kink, so yeah, dangerous argument. When does this line stop?
If one wanted to be far less hypocritical on this, then one must by logic be against all of it. That includes the suggestive curvy designs of the Blades from Xenoblade Chronicles 2 (for a T rated game, which includes 14-17 I think), the person's actions of wanting to upload a blatant inappropriate picture of Shiver, the scene from Dexter's Laboratory, and many more.
Also I can understand a bit if we were talking about uploading say a detailed foot for the SOLE purpose of masturbation where it's clearly designed for it. I could at least view that on a tame level of bad (though I think calling someone a groomer or a pedophile for it alone is a bit too far as it's possible someone might do that without being interested into children alone) because I think that is a lot similar to nudity of sharing exposed breasts. Sadly, it seems a lot of people are confusing tamed suggestive references, which has been done a lot already in many kid medias, with flat-out porn.
______________
Disclaimer: I am not too sure what the law said. Don't do any activity that is breaking the law. I am not sure if what I'm defending is itself legal or not.
Article might get updated.
No comments:
Post a Comment