[ Rules / FAQ ] [ meta / b / media / img / feels / hb / x ]

/meta/ - Board Discussion


*Text* => Text

**Text** => Text

***Text*** => Text

[spoiler]Text[/spoiler] => Text

Direct Link
Options NSFW image
Sage (thread won't be bumped)

Check the Catalog before making a new thread.
Do not respond to maleposters. See Rule 7.
Please read the rules! Last update: 04/27/2021


Anonymous 5130

If shotas(and, I assume lolies) both nsfw and sfw are banned from the site in general then why is that not posted in the rules? At best we have a blurb on /nsfw/ but that just seems to imply that no nsfw shota is to be posted, as opposed to it being against the rules to post Naruto.

Image unrelated

Anonymous 5131


I also don't like the ban, maybe by banning sfw shotas they mean that pictures without sexual imegry but still having hints of it is forbidden?

I don't see the reason why they must ban shotas like Honey from Ouran Highschool host club, or Hare from HareGuu.

Anonymous 5132

I'm not for or against the ban as much as confused that admin stated sfw shota was banned from the entire site so matter of factly I feel like I missed the announcement that made it against the rules at any point.

Again, all I was aware of was that shota and loli hentai is banned on nsfw (and by extension the site) with no relation to sfw shota.

Anonymous Admin 5136

Sorry for it being vague. Shotaposting is banned site-wide, not only in a sexual context, but also in terms of fawning over, romantisizing, and so on. No such content of minors (or minor-looking) people is allowed. I'm in the process of updating the rules and will make sure to add this.

Anonymous 5139

Is the BL thread allowed to stay up as long as they don't post images of the teenagers they fawn over?

Anonymous 5140

I think the 15-17 year olds that are often found in BL and ships are rarely drawn or written to resemble children, so it's ambiguous enough to not be considered "shota" in 99% of cases. I think.
Generally, "shota" refers to pubescent or prepubescent boys, or older boys who look that young, like >>5131

Anonymous Admin 5143

I agree with what >>5140 said. Of course this can be pretty subjective, but it also depends on the context of the post. When in doubt, please report and we'll work it out.

Anonymous 5146

I think, for starters, admitting to specifically liking shota should be enough to consider a ban. If coupled with a picture that illustrates what the poster is talking about, it should be reported.

Anonymous 5165


>admitting to liking shota should be enough to consider a ban
Absolutely mental take, oh no, ban me for liking guys before they become hairy messes
I can literally thirstpost with normies on fb about shotas but not here?

Ummm, what exactly is wrong with it?
Somehow, its socially acceptable for men to like younger women, but not me?
>oh, you like killua? well now your banned sweetie
Mental, instead we have 10+ tranny hate threads and 15 depression and self harm threads, but i cant have a thread to talk about cute boys ffs

This is supposed to be a place for non normie girltalk, instead its just a place where we have to constantly worry about being banned for having problematic favs(Stop. )

Anonymous 5166

i love you this made me laugh so hard

Anonymous 5167

But see that pic totally is ambiguous. 25 year olds look exactly the same ffff
It really disturbs me to see actualy prepubescent kids posted on here though. Now that is just creepy and ruins my mood :(

Anonymous 5168

>Somehow, its socially acceptable for men to like younger women, but not me?
How about you don't try to justify liking little boys or being a creep just because moids are pedophiles? Also where the fuck do you think you are? We shit on males for being degenerate pedos all the time, and we will shit on you for being one, too.
And fyi, the character you posted at least looks ambiguous, like the other anon said. I've seen other shotafags post about liking unambiguously prepubescent characters. That's the sort of person that should be banned on sight.

Anonymous 5171

shota isn’t a term for young men it’s a term for prepubescent boys, there’s a difference between types like picrel and fetishizing a child and trying to justify the latter is still disgusting. just cause other sites put up with pedo-pandering doesn’t mean cc should

Anonymous 5173

>oh yea picrel doesn't count even if he is like 13/14 teehee but below that they have holy bodies that you shouldn't feast your eyes upon
god you amer*cans are mentally ill

Anonymous 5174

>you should "feast your eyes upon" children below the age of 13/14
>defending your preference for underage boys at all
Fuck off pedophile. This is why everyone finds you obnoxious.

Anonymous 5181

fuming and no argument's so results to " >ok p-pedo!!! " as expected like the typical twitteroid
the cartoon drawing pic related is as " pedo " as another drawing depicting for example a 9 yo, don't play the double standards game

[Return] [Catalog]
[ Rules / FAQ ] [ meta / b / media / img / feels / hb / x ]