• Sign up or login, and you'll have full access to opportunities of forum.

The Beauty Of Wooden Pony

Go to CruxDreams.com
Dafnees said:
But she is only a teenager !!!
Sincerely, I prefer to see a real woman...
Click to expand...
It's INCREDIBLE !!!!
Did you notice one of my lastest post (with a Pichard picture) has just been deleted?
Someone told me about the reason was: "the picture shows and under age victim"

I find this a great HYPOCRISY, when this forum is full of examples of this under age victims or something worse.
Actually, I already complained about this in a post because I personally was not attracted to it. But anyway I respect the tastes of each one since it is only about fantasies.

However, I do not consider fair that my post was deleted when there are other posts in this forum where teenagers are shown and nothing happens. Why?
Staff members should be careful with these things that threaten everyone's freedom.:nono:

Classic Whipping Scenes Only

Just another day at the Tree estate? Tree rarely uses a whip... I said 'rarely'!
www.cruxforums.com

All the best,
Dafnees
 
Yeah, it's hard to fathom the reasons here. I wholeheartedly support the crusade against real life pedophiles, as the images they exchange means that somewhere, sometime a real child has been abused. But when it comes to pixels, I'm a bit confused. It's not about real life child abuse prevention (a very worthy pursuit), it's more of virtue signalling and norm coforming. Pixels can take abuse, that's why we're here. To abuse them motherfuckers.
 
Dafnees said:
It doesn't matter, "under age" to me means less than 18. Am I wrong?
It 's not the point to argue about the exactly age of a drawing character, don't you think?
Click to expand...
You are right when it comes to photos, underage means less than 18 years of age, but with drawings I wouldn't be so sure about the age assessment
 
doe1971 said:
Yeah, it's hard to fathom the reasons here. I wholeheartedly support the crusade against real life pedophiles, as the images they exchange means that somewhere, sometime a real child has been abused. But when it comes to pixels, I'm a bit confused. It's not about real life child abuse prevention (a very worthy pursuit), it's more of virtue signalling and norm coforming. Pixels can take abuse, that's why we're here. To abuse them motherfuckers.
Click to expand...
Well then you’re questioning the site rules, not the actions of the admins in implementing them. My take is that those rules are there to protect the site (and its users) from legal repercussions. “Virtue signalling “ doesn’t come into it at all, just practical necessity.
 
montycrusto said:
Well then you’re questioning the site rules, not the actions of the admins in implementing them. My take is that those rules are there to protect the site (and its users) from legal repercussions. “Virtue signalling “ doesn’t come into it at all, just practical necessity.
Click to expand...

Not really. This place has its limitations and as long as they are enforced even-handedly I have no problem with that. I'm not the idiot who screams 'Freedom of Speech' and '1st amendment!' in front of a private enterprise. They obviously don't really understand much.

No, my ire is directed more toward the concept (for example in Canada one fellow was accused of pedofilic charges after buying a -legal in Japan- doll in a shape of a young boy in a sexual position). Regardless of the personal dislike of the guy's tastes, question is what real life child has been harmed to warrant a sentence here? I might speculate that one horny pedophile with his robot is less a danger to society than one without any means to 'discharge' himself. Just check the history of Catholic priests (who can't marry) vs. Orthodox priests (who can) and the sexual abuse they inflicted.

No, my rant is mostly against a cultural more of our times and it's lack of practical virtues, done in the name of virtue signalling. Unfortunately so much of our political actions nowadays are driven not by the results but by the intentions. Protecting young pixels from harm is a good intention. Real life pedofiles who can't find a way to jerk off their sick fantasies are bad results.
 
Dafnees said:
It's INCREDIBLE !!!!
Did you notice one of my lastest post (with a Pichard picture) has just been deleted?
Someone told me about the reason was: "the picture shows and under age victim"

I find this a great HYPOCRISY, when this forum is full of examples of this under age victims or something worse.
Actually, I already complained about this in a post because I personally was not attracted to it. But anyway I respect the tastes of each one since it is only about fantasies.

However, I do not consider fair that my post was deleted when there are other posts in this forum where teenagers are shown and nothing happens. Why?
Staff members should be careful with these things that threaten everyone's freedom.:nono:

Classic Whipping Scenes Only

Just another day at the Tree estate? Tree rarely uses a whip... I said 'rarely'!
www.cruxforums.com

All the best,
Dafnees
Click to expand...
Hi. The pics that you just refer to are indeed underage and will be deleted. I can assure that it is not due to hypocrisy but more sheer bloody tiredness after being on duty for 12 hours. We do NEED this stuff to be reported asap. It is by far the best way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom