Quote - " same applies to someone who cleverly obscures TOS violations with objects in the foreground, hands, clever cropping, etc., for example. IMO a render of two people having sex, with the genitals obscured by a cup on a coffee table in the foreground is no less a TOS violation than if the genitals were in plain view.".

So what's being said here is that a man and woman in a clinch would be breaking the tos cos they could be doing it through the zipper. how on earth can you surmise there screwing if you cant see. couldn't they be just smooching or cuddling. so now no one can do couples and coffee cups. ...how can you cleverly obscure a tos violation for gods sake. you either break the tos or you don't. if a violation is obscure how can it be deemed a violation as such and if it is how can it be deemed obscure. sorry but it sounds a bit to pedantic to to be actually talking about coffee cups and willys in the context of removing something. what next...nudity advisories for figures obscuring breasts and ass with lingerie........as for 10 yr olds and what you allow. ...this site would be a complete no no to my kids. whilst a lot of whats here could loosely be called art much of it that leans towards big tits and come hither smiles is mainly tutilating smut...i don't expect anyone to agree with me but pulleeeeeeeeze. take a look at some of the jugs on a vast amount of the female renders. i suppose little johnny needs something to work with whilst exploring himself lmao...in my day it was the gus catalogue . when my kids wanted to see art i took them to galleries. not smut filled websites.  and i do realize there is some fantastically great work on this site and others like it.  just that intermingled with the good stuff is ...no other word i can think of but smutt jmo

billy

:)