â„–15625724[Quote]
broken archive award
â„–15625728[Quote]
Im scared about what the replies to this post will be
â„–15625731[Quote]
>>15625717 (OP)inb4 troonslop spam
> â„–15625769[Quote]
This is the worst administration ever
â„–15625774[Quote]
>>15625769sentient
>I'm trans btw â„–15625780[Quote]
>>15625765
So if I give 'oyta a beard or 'ita breasts I can post them? Didn't think so.
â„–15625797[Quote]
>>15625780The difference is that those variants have history behind their names. It's based on "lolita" and "shota" which is synonymous with pedophilia. They're not the same
â„–15625813[Quote]
wait did a joon just delete that? geg
â„–15625818[Quote]
i thought it was the proportion sizes in all the images i've seen so far make it clear that babyjak is a fat ass 40-something ABDL and a married man
i remember the 'lita/'oyta controversy on the booru and one of the big things is that not only did they use the child variant, but they used childlike proportions and even traced irl 'p on one occasion, that is, justifiably banned by all metrics
feels weird that babyjak is used as a standin for gen alpha/ipad kids while simultaneously being used like this, though.
â„–15625820[Quote]
>>15625797So we could just change the names and keep the 'riants? There's nothing inherently pedophilic about either of them besides the name. Just ban any pedophilic jokes.
>babyjak isn't actually a baby, he's always had a beardThis is true, but most version give him baby proportions. He's always been an absurdist character that doesn't fit cleanly in either category. Given that he's mostly portrayed with childlike behavior rather than that of a coherent adult, I'd elect to lump him in with 'lita and 'oyta. If we're going to bring back those 'riants we definitely have to give them new names THOUGH.
â„–15625902[Quote]
Quote is kuz btw
â„–15625904[Quote]
>>15625797Mental gymnastics lol.
Babies are infants, you know that? Must be a far fetched theory for you, but most babies are infants.
The variants Soylita and Shoyta are banned because they are variants of kids that have been sexualized. You use zero intuition and use retarded midwit loopholes to justify posting sexualized kids, and you know that lol but of course you pretend to be retarded because you'd be banned, or you won't be uncomfortable with the implications of such. If they were called anything else, it didn't matter because they always sexualized it. Technically shoytajak and soylitas are allowed, but not tagged.
The name is not the source of the two variant's objectification, but the object's properties that allowed itself to be exploited by artists for their sexual gain. And it was excessively expressed because of the anonymous nature of this website, combined with the outraged reaction by others (same mechanism you LOVE to exploit, so I know you're one of those same people). The reason why people called it Shoyta and Soylita is not because they wanted to simply objectify it by the name, but sexualize the childlike properties that it already had and apply that name to compliment them. That's like saying people only fuck prostitutes because they can call them sluts and whores.
We are talking about properties of the two variants, and what kind of flies it attracts. And you are one of those flies.
>Shoyta and Soylita were only banned because people made porn out of it, so no need to ban cacajak porn while I make cacajak porn out of itLike your mental gymnastics don't even make sense, this is genuinly so low iq it baffles me.
â„–15625923[Quote]
>>>15625797
>Mental gymnastics lol.
>
>Babies are infants, you know that? Must be a far fetched theory for you, but most babies are infants.
>The variants Soylita and Shoyta are banned because they are variants of kids that have been sexualized. You use zero intuition and use retarded midwit loopholes to justify posting sexualized kids, and you know that lol but of course you pretend to be retarded because you'd be banned, or you won't be uncomfortable with the implications of such. If they were called anything else, it didn't matter because they always sexualized it. Technically shoytajak and soylitas are allowed, but not tagged.
>
>The name is not the source of the two variant's objectification, but the object's properties that allowed itself to be exploited by artists for their sexual gain. And it was excessively expressed because of the anonymous nature of this website, combined with the outraged reaction by others (same mechanism you LOVE to exploit, so I know you're one of those same people). The reason why people called it Shoyta and Soylita is not because they wanted to simply objectify it by the name, but sexualize the childlike properties that it already had and apply that name to compliment them. That's like saying people only fuck prostitutes because they can call them sluts and whores.
>
>We are talking about properties of the two variants, and what kind of flies it attracts. And you are one of those flies.
>>Shoyta and Soylita were only banned because people made porn out of it, so no need to ban cacajak porn while I make cacajak porn out of it
>Like your mental gymnastics don't even make sense, this is genuinly so low iq it baffles me.
â„–15625924[Quote]
>>15625904We aren't talking about banning Shoyta, Soylita, or Caca entirely. But banning sexual and pornographic material of the variants. It's apparent you're so mindbroken by sexualizing babies you immediately associate banning cacajak porn with banning caca itself. You see him as a sexual object, not some funny baby.
You know it's fucked up. And you use obvious mental gymnastics to justify yourself.
â„–15625980[Quote]
p and oreos
â„–15625986[Quote]
>>>15625797
>Mental gymnastics lol.
>
>Babies are infants, you know that? Must be a far fetched theory for you, but most babies are infants.
>The variants Soylita and Shoyta are banned because they are variants of kids that have been sexualized. You use zero intuition and use retarded midwit loopholes to justify posting sexualized kids, and you know that lol but of course you pretend to be retarded because you'd be banned, or you won't be uncomfortable with the implications of such. If they were called anything else, it didn't matter because they always sexualized it. Technically shoytajak and soylitas are allowed, but not tagged.
>
>The name is not the source of the two variant's objectification, but the object's properties that allowed itself to be exploited by artists for their sexual gain. And it was excessively expressed because of the anonymous nature of this website, combined with the outraged reaction by others (same mechanism you LOVE to exploit, so I know you're one of those same people). The reason why people called it Shoyta and Soylita is not because they wanted to simply objectify it by the name, but sexualize the childlike properties that it already had and apply that name to compliment them. That's like saying people only fuck prostitutes because they can call them sluts and whores.
>
>We are talking about properties of the two variants, and what kind of flies it attracts. And you are one of those flies.
>>Shoyta and Soylita were only banned because people made porn out of it, so no need to ban cacajak porn while I make cacajak porn out of it
>Like your mental gymnastics don't even make sense, this is genuinly so low iq it baffles me.
â„–15625987[Quote]
nusoooois, what is this nusois what is this
â„–15625996[Quote]
Gold is a retarded attentionwhore who goons on KiwiFarms