okay going after artists is a little much.. certain styles of art depict females in an ambiguous way where small woman like humans are not actually depicted as girls but full grown women.. He says that he pictures them as women in his mind and he gives these girls woman like features.. children do not actually have curvy hips like that
this kind of artwork is also common in japanese manga and anime and its not always directly translatable to pedophilia
i think this guy sounds like a fucking creep but it sets a dangerous precedent going after someone just for what he drew or painted.. art is subjective and protected by the constitution as a for of speech or expression.. and again i personally think this guys is a creep but there are other artists that just draw short women with defined sexual features and ive seen people in pizza gate threads label them as cp producers which is a dangerous road to go down.. AND like ive said every artist practices drawing a range of different kind of nude human bodies.. that is what helps artists drape clothes over basic human forms.. so just making it illegal to draw a nude child is the same kind of assualt on consciousness as thought crimes like children being expelled from school for drawing guns
Images of child pornography are not protected under First Amendment rights, and are illegal contraband under federal law. Section 2256 of Title 18, United States Code, defines child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone under 18 years of age).Jul 6, 2015
...
(11) the term “indistinguishable” used with respect to a depiction, means virtually indistinguishable, in that the depiction is such that an ordinary person viewing the depiction would conclude that the depiction is of an actual minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults.
"This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults" You just proved me right dumbass!
view the rest of the comments →
PHEONIX_RISING666 ago
okay going after artists is a little much.. certain styles of art depict females in an ambiguous way where small woman like humans are not actually depicted as girls but full grown women.. He says that he pictures them as women in his mind and he gives these girls woman like features.. children do not actually have curvy hips like that
this kind of artwork is also common in japanese manga and anime and its not always directly translatable to pedophilia
JastheMace ago
and you believe that shit?
PHEONIX_RISING666 ago
i think this guy sounds like a fucking creep but it sets a dangerous precedent going after someone just for what he drew or painted.. art is subjective and protected by the constitution as a for of speech or expression.. and again i personally think this guys is a creep but there are other artists that just draw short women with defined sexual features and ive seen people in pizza gate threads label them as cp producers which is a dangerous road to go down.. AND like ive said every artist practices drawing a range of different kind of nude human bodies.. that is what helps artists drape clothes over basic human forms.. so just making it illegal to draw a nude child is the same kind of assualt on consciousness as thought crimes like children being expelled from school for drawing guns
cakeoflightylight ago
Images of child pornography are not protected under First Amendment rights, and are illegal contraband under federal law. Section 2256 of Title 18, United States Code, defines child pornography as any visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct involving a minor (someone under 18 years of age).Jul 6, 2015 ... (11) the term “indistinguishable” used with respect to a depiction, means virtually indistinguishable, in that the depiction is such that an ordinary person viewing the depiction would conclude that the depiction is of an actual minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults.
PHEONIX_RISING666 ago
"This definition does not apply to depictions that are drawings, cartoons, sculptures, or paintings depicting minors or adults" You just proved me right dumbass!
cakeoflightylight ago
If you read my other comment, I just admitted you were right and I corrected myself with the word "EDIT."