Edit | Leave a Comment | Favorite
More Like This: (Beta Temporary Feature)
User Comments:
Anonymous commented at 2012-04-11 12:25:19 » #1046622
gelbooru.com/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=1485026
Uuhh...
Eehhh.
yeah. keystrokes suck ass
2 Points
Flag
gelbooru.com/index.php?page=post&s=view&id=1485026
Uuhh...
Eehhh.
yeah. keystrokes suck ass
2 Points
Flag
Otaku2012 commented at 2012-04-27 19:35:27 » #1058779
Shotacon(outside Japan) sexualization of underage/child-like anime characters. Underage/legal definition of a child in Japan(where shotacon is made) is 20. So are partly does matter. but so does appearance which is why CHILD-LIKE is there.
4 Points
Flag
Shotacon(outside Japan) sexualization of underage/child-like anime characters. Underage/legal definition of a child in Japan(where shotacon is made) is 20. So are partly does matter. but so does appearance which is why CHILD-LIKE is there.
4 Points
Flag
XerBlade commented at 2017-11-14 16:14:02 » #2183716
Tags and legal definitions have always been completely separate concepts, but whatever...
Here's this site's official definition of the shota *tag*:
"Images containing sexually explicit or sexually suggestive content involving a young male. The child tag is preferred for rating:safe images. Like loli, but with boys instead of girls. All the restrictions of loli apply to shota as well, so be careful not to tag safe images with this tag. For images involving prepubescent boys engaging in sexual activity with a female, whether that female is an adult or another child, remember to tag the post with the straight_shota tag."
And, since it states all restrictions of the loli tag also apply to the shota tag, here's the relevant part of the loli tag definition (the entire definition is way too long to paste here):
"Please note it doesn't matter whether the character is canonically of age -- if they look like kids, they are loli for the purpose of tagging; and if they don't look like kids, they aren't."
But another restriction of the loli tag, which doesn't apply to this specific image, should also be mentioned for anyone using the contents of this comment for determining whether to tag images in general, considering it is specifically called out in the shota tag definition.
"Do not use this tag for rating:safe posts of fully-clothed girls, that is what the child tag is for. By definition, images that should be tagged loli will always have a questionable or explicit rating."
1 Points
Flag
Tags and legal definitions have always been completely separate concepts, but whatever...
Here's this site's official definition of the shota *tag*:
"Images containing sexually explicit or sexually suggestive content involving a young male. The child tag is preferred for rating:safe images. Like loli, but with boys instead of girls. All the restrictions of loli apply to shota as well, so be careful not to tag safe images with this tag. For images involving prepubescent boys engaging in sexual activity with a female, whether that female is an adult or another child, remember to tag the post with the straight_shota tag."
And, since it states all restrictions of the loli tag also apply to the shota tag, here's the relevant part of the loli tag definition (the entire definition is way too long to paste here):
"Please note it doesn't matter whether the character is canonically of age -- if they look like kids, they are loli for the purpose of tagging; and if they don't look like kids, they aren't."
But another restriction of the loli tag, which doesn't apply to this specific image, should also be mentioned for anyone using the contents of this comment for determining whether to tag images in general, considering it is specifically called out in the shota tag definition.
"Do not use this tag for rating:safe posts of fully-clothed girls, that is what the child tag is for. By definition, images that should be tagged loli will always have a questionable or explicit rating."
1 Points
Flag
1