Why is this so hard? A). Children have a different head size to body length ratio than adults. Poser has a head length guide that one can use. B). Children *do not* have a bust line. A bust develops during puberty - after which the 'child' is a child no more. I just checked and Aiko, by default, has a bust. Default Aiko is not (!!!!) a child despite her facial appearance. In fact, her facial appearance is irrelevant in her default state. An objective measure would be something like: --- If the head is less than X% of the body length (whatever is normal for children) **and** the bust is less than X% of the waist or hip size (for example something representative of an "A" cup) then it's a 'child.' Otherwise it's not. --- This will allow people to create small busted women or fairies. And you could could still go to a court, look the judge in the face and say, "Children don't have developed breasts like this figure. Nor are they biologically built with these proportions. Therefore it's medically not possible for this to be a child. It's a stylized bunch of pixels." For the record, pedophiles are interested in small, childlike chests and figures. A cute anime face with B cups and adult proportions is not what interests them. And I use B cups as an example to point out that you don't have to give a figure an abnormally large bust for this to be defensible.

Quote - An objective checklist could be something along the lines of:

1. Pose
2. Face
3. Skin Texture
4. Hair Style (styles are not really age specific)
5. Clothing
6. Environment
7. Breast size (I was 36C when I was 12 years old. My cousin who is 41 and has had 3 kids is nearly completely flat chested, so breast size is not indicative of age)

but none of those things are quantifiable. each would help describe some aspect of the image that the inspector could say are "too childlike" but there is no objective measurement of what is "too childlike".

Quote - B). Children do not have a bust line. A bust develops during puberty - after which the 'child' is a child no more.

for legal purposes a child is a child until reaching the age of 18 (most common age of "maturity").

puberty occurs prior to age 18.

 

Quote - B). Children do not have a bust line.

Not to be constantly argumentative, but I (over)filled a b-cup by my 12th birthday. 

On the other hand, my mother, who just turned 50, wears a bra simply because she feels immodest without one, especially if it gets cold.  She doesn't even come close to filling a training bra.

So, no, bust line is not indicative of age.  Only of physical maturity, which is different for each individual.

MS

Quote - For the record, pedophiles are interested in small, childlike chests and figures.

true by the strictest of definitions. there is actually a diffrent term for people attracted to adolecents (time between puberty and adulthood)

in common use the word pedophile is used to refer to anyone attracted to those "underage" (typicaly 18yrs old).

In Mexico, the girls start having babies at 12. So by their idea, this is the age of maturity. Technically, a girl becomes a woman when she gets her period, as she can then bear babies. If god (or mother nature if u prefer) feels that youre old enuff to have babies then, its quite possible it was intended to be the age of maturity. Otherwise, wed get our periods at 18.

I know its different in the U.S. and not how we feel as a whole - but who says who is right? Its just how WE feel in America. Sort of like religion.... its a what you believe type thing and all based on perspective.

I suppose theres something to be said for having your own site. No rules to adhere to... total freedom. And there are plenty of other art community sites who dont enforce such things as well. Its my guess thats part of why so many have left Rendo... change is good and setting some limitations as well, but when you start enforcing too many rules at once, it stymies artistic creativity. Bad idea in an art community.

@Tyger_Purr, A person is a "minor" until they reach 18 (or whatever the local law is). However, a "minor" is not a "child." I will grant you that the term "child' is often used loosely. However, that is not correct usage of the term. Post-adolescents are not the same as children. As far as differentiating between a 16 year old and a 19 year old, I don't know that anyone can do that without a birth certificate. Therefore it's impossible to do for non-real figures. Perhaps my perception of the line being drawn at adolescence is becaused I interned with the Probation Department's Sex Offender Unit In Ft. Worth while working on my degree. One of the things that was pointed out by the head of the unit was that it was absolutely normal for males to be physically attracted to post-pubescent females. That was not 'deviant' in any way. The attraction wasn't deviant, but acting on that attraction was clearly illegal and criminal. Pedophiles were the ones that liked pre-pubescent kids. @MorriganShadow I wasn't addressing age. I know that development varies from person to person. I was addressing growth stage. Since a 3D character has no official date of birth, all you can do that's relevant is evaluate are they pre-or post pubescent. That is the only place where any kind of objective measures can be implemented. There's no such thing as a 6 year old character. Or an 8 year old one. Or a 12 year old one. Or a 16 year old one. Or a 17 years and 354 days old one or a 22 year old one or a 27 year old one. They are infants/ toddlers/children or post pubescents with the occasional old model defined by grey hair/baldness/wrinkle textures. ;-)

Quote - In Mexico, the girls start having babies at 12. So by their idea, this is the age of maturity. Technically, a girl becomes a woman when she gets her period, as she can then bear babies. If god (or mother nature if u prefer) feels that youre old enuff to have babies then, its quite possible it was intended to be the age of maturity. Otherwise, wed get our periods at 18.

in the US girls are having babies at 12. they are not legally able to marry, buy or sell alcohol, sign contracts, drive, vote, join the military,  nor consent to sexual intercourse.

what girls are physicaly capible of is irrelavent. the only definition that is important is what is written in law.

---

if god(s) wanted us to be naked we would have been born that way.

 

Quote - Pedophiles were the ones that liked pre-pubescent kids.

here is what i was looking for... (emphasis a

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophiles

Ephebophilia, also known as hebephilia, is the condition of being sexually attracted primarily or exclusively to adolescents. These terms are used in contrast with pedophilia; however pedophilia is sometimes used more broadly in the western world to describe both ephebophilia and attraction to younger children, that is, any person younger than the legal age of consent. Ephebophilia is a term of recent coinage, and does not have broad academic acceptance as constituting a paraphilia.

 

I've always thought minors who had babies were given some rights? Also, aren't minors who get married (legally, with parental consent) given rights beyond their age? I honestly don't know - I've never checked into that.

Quote - > Quote - B). Children do not have a bust line. A bust develops during puberty - after which the 'child' is a child no more.

for legal purposes a child is a child until reaching the age of 18 (most common age of "maturity").

puberty occurs prior to age 18.

Just to point out a rather large flaw in what you just said..... the legal age of consent, ie the age at which an individual is legally responsible for their own actions,  is NOT 18. Not even in the dear ole US of A!!
18 years of age is the legal age of consent in only 15 of the States in the USA. Most of the remaining states stipulate either 17 or 16, and in 3 cases (Iowa, Missouri and South Carolina) the age is actually 14.
The rest of the world varies a lot, with the age ranging from 12 to 20 (or sometimes none at all) with the average being about 16.

Also, just on a side note your comment about paedophile's preferences seems to be ignoring the fact that quite a large proportion of said paedophiles are homosexual.

I'd settle for just putting this in the context of the offending material having an erotic or otherwise "titilating" aspect.  I'm sorry, you're just not going to convince me that "Virgin and Child with the Young St. John the Baptist," by Luca Cambiaso should be TOS'ed, which it would be if I posted a rendition of it.

Quote - I've always thought minors who had babies were given some rights? Also, aren't minors who get married (legally, with parental consent) given rights beyond their age? I honestly don't know - I've never checked into that.

I have heard that in some places minors who are married can buy alcohol. which i find funny, but I have seen no evidence that it is true.

I've never looked into it.

@Tyger_Purr That's the first time I've heard that term. Thanks for passing it on. The Wikipedia article was interesting as well. We're dealing with certain inadequacies in the english language. There are medical, psychological, legal, and general usage differences in the way some of these words are defined and that causes miscommunication at times. What we're missing right now is a legal definition of 'child.' Anyone got a reference? I seem to recall having seen one posted here before... @badmoon Yep, I know I've deliberately stayed away from the homosexual side of the issue. I have no proposal for an objective way to determine if a male figure might be a child or not. The head length to body ratio would be a reasonable start but I don't know that it by itself would be adequate.

Quote - for legal purposes a child is a child until reaching the age of 18 (most common age of "maturity").

puberty occurs prior to age 18.

Just to point out a rather large flaw in what you just said..... the legal age of consent, ie the age at which an individual is legally responsible for their own actions,  is NOT 18. Not even in the dear ole US of A!!
18 years of age is the legal age of consent in only 15 of the States in the USA. Most of the remaining states stipulate either 17 or 16, and in 3 cases (Iowa, Missouri and South Carolina) the age is actually 14.
The rest of the world varies a lot, with the age ranging from 12 to 20 (or sometimes none at all) with the average being about 16. then i shall revise my statment here to read

for legal purposes a child is a minor until reaching the age of 18

a minor cannot sign a release form for use or distrabution of their photo.

Quote - Also, just on a side note your comment about paedophile's preferences seems to be ignoring the fact that quite a large proportion of said paedophiles are homosexual.

Please excuse me if this goes in a direction you did not intend.

I find the association of homosexuality and paedophiles to be misleading. the vast majority of male perpitrators with male victums do not identify themselves as "homosexual". There is no evadence that men who identify themselves as "homosexual" are more likely to be peaedophiles.

I do understand (and have heard before) the statement that a man who violates a boy "is a homosexual" (by definition) but "protecting" yourself/your children from people who identify themselves as homosexual is only giving a false sense of security.

 

from the prevous link. i did find this statement interesting... (again emphasis added)

A perpetrator of child sexual abuse is, despite all medical definitions, commonly assumed to be a pedophile, and referred to as such; however, there may be other motivations for the crime[19] (such as stress, marital problems, or the unavailability of an adult partner[32]), much as adult rape can have non-sexual reasons. Thus, child sexual abuse alone may or may not be an indicator that its perpetrator is a pedophile; most perpetrators of it are in fact not primarily interested in children.[33]

Those who have committed sexual crimes against children, but do not meet the normal diagnosis criteria for pedophilia, are referred to as situational, opportunistic, or regressed offenders, whereas offenders primarily attracted toward children are called structured, preferential, or fixated pedophiles, as their orientation is fixed by the structure of their personality. It is estimated that only 2 to 10 percent of child sexual abuse perpetrators meet the regular criteria for pedophilia. (Kinsey-Report, Lautmann, Brongersma, Groth).

 

Attached Link: Wikipedia Child Pornography

This Wiki article talks about child pornography. It mentions one set of interesting guidelines the "Dost Factors" that have been used in some courts. Interesting excerpts: "Most countries' laws provide an exception for materials that have artistic merit." "The United States Supreme Court decided in 2002 that the previous American prohibition of simulated child pornography was unconstitutional (Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition)." (Simulated child pornography is exactly what Poser art would be called if it was used to create 'child pornography') http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse This Wiki article briefly discusses legal definitions. There is a distinction in the way sex with pre-pubescents is viewed compared to that with post-pubescents as well. I also simply looked up "Child" on Wiki which talked more about the developmental aspects.

To get somewhat back on subject the TOS does specificly state.

"Images of children or characters resembling children under 18 years of age, depicting nudity are no longer permitted. "

Their site, their rules. I guess if youre going to post here, u have to adhere to them, whether u agree or not.

Sexual preference does not have any bearing on pedophilia. Those are two different traits. Gender preference does not equal age preference. Nor does it always determine the victim. I had one guy on probation who molested his prepubescent daughter and her friend. He was a self-professed homosexual. His victims were girls but, by his own admission, they looked close enough to young boys and they were available, and so he went for it.

I think the discussion is running too far from original. I'd like to know whether nekkid A3 Base is considered an adult or a child, because she seems to be both at the same time, depending on the mod/admin.

Quote - I think the discussion is running too far from original. I'd like to know whether nekkid A3 Base is considered an adult or a child, because she seems to be both at the same time, depending on the mod/admin.

i dont think there is an answer to your question. it will depend on the image.

images are reviewed by more than one mod/admin so one individuals opinion is not the defining characteristic.

That "under 18" is the problem. They've established a criteria that can not be objectively enforced because it can not be objectiively defined. It sounds good legally, on paper, but any figure that objectively fits the criteria for "post-pubescent" could be said to look at least 18 so it's impossible to determine if they are a minor. That's why I suggested what I did. It gives room for artistic freedom but it's based on real differences in human development stages and most importantly it can be objectively evaluated. Anyway, I've gotta go. It's been fun bouncing this stuff around. And for the record, I'm trying to be constructive rather than slam anyone. I sure hope I didn't come across that way. ;-)

Sorry to keep nit-picking, but even the term minor has a variable age range, even again in the USA.
The states of Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Missouri, South Carolina, and Texas define a minor as a person of under 17, Connecticut, New York, and North Carolina define a minor as someone under 16.

This is, however, completely irrelevant on 2 grounds.

The first being that the age of a person legally being able to sign a document (release form) is based on the age of consent and not the age of majority.

Secondly none of my Poser characters seem to have learned to write yet! ;)

Quote - I think the discussion is running too far from original. I'd like to know whether nekkid A3 Base is considered an adult or a child, because she seems to be both at the same time, depending on the mod/admin.

Schroding'ers Aiko? :biggrin:

Attached Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent#_note-waites

Here's another Wikipedia link.

The age of legal consent when the United States was founded in 1776 was 10 years old.  Over time, the abuses which this condition allowed became abundantly clear: and a lot of so-called "moral crusaders" made it their object to raise the age.  Children in the US (and in the UK) can now enjoy the protections which have been granted them by the efforts of those 19th-century "moral crusaders".  There are those around these days who would like nothing better than to turn back the clock on this.....hopefully they'll get nowhere.

It's impossible to judge an issue like this -- or images like these -- in any way other than what the admins here have done.  Artistic value notwithstanding.  It's subjective.  It has to be -- by its very nature.  Sure, in real life someone can be 21 & look 12 -- I've known people like that.  But for the purposes of gallery posts of 3D images: that's irrelevant.  3D characters are, by their very nature, of subjective age.  So of necessity it's a subjective call.  In the virtual world, a figure that "looks 12" is 12.  Not 21.

IMO, given current conditions -- the admins have done about the best that they can with this.

BTW -- most porn sites don't allow the posting of ANY images of children -- even in non-sexual situations.  Posting nude images of children on pretty much any of the Poser-releated adult sites is one of the few ways to quickly get into Big Trouble on those same sites.  At the very least: it'll lead to an instant banning.

I've never understood why Rendo (or several other of the major Poser-related websites -- all of which have similar rules re:this subject to Rendo's) should be required to allow material which will get someone instantly banned from a porn site.  Perhaps the suggestion will be made that the purpose of a hardcore porn site is different.  Well, the purpose of Rendo is different, too.  Naked kids aren't allowed here.

IMO, Renderosity made the right call with this one.  And I applaud them for sticking to their guns on the topic.

Quote - Sorry to keep nit-picking, but even the term minor has a variable age range, even again in the USA.

I was under the impression it was 18 but i may be mistaken.

it all becomes irrelavent  because of the wording of the TOS which specificaly states 18.

besides all of that the images are not based on what is or is not legal. as stated before Poser images (because they do not contain real children) could not be child porn. However the rules are most likely based on what they will catch flak for (whether it is from paypal or the public at large) not on what is strictly legal.

 

wow! this thread kinda deviated in my absence!!! how did age of consent and pedos get in here!!! i was only curious like DrMCclark picked up on, that traditional art it would seem, if posted here would be removed and warnings/ban would follow!!! just natural nudity!! nothing at all to do with sex!! i would have to conclude that in America all nudity is somehow linked to sex or sexual urges!! i guess things are just different here in Europe where you can be nude and it can have nothing to do with sex whatsoever!! most people i have known wouldn't think to look twice at someone(whatever their age) if they were nude on a beach or something, because it is just natural!! it might raise an eyebrow or two if there were sex involved, but if someone is just sunbathing why would it bother you!! i guess people were born with clothes on in America!! doesn't matter anyway i got my answer from Tyger_purr, i hadn't read that before!! so thanks!!

if you want to be able to draw anything in the world, be it landscape,still life, etc... to be a master at all these elements, the only true way you will be in control of your lines, is if you have done figure drawing,nude and clothed,young and old, big or small!!! without studying human form, you can't ever expect to be a master of art, you can't even consider yourself a deciple!! this site isn't really an art based site, it is just a marketplace, the marketplace is defended but the art is not. i think the banner at the top should be changed to reflect this! it is not an art community!!

Vince, keep in mind America was founded by the Puritans, who basically were very
sexually repressed, felt every form of pleasure was a sin, and kept themselves covered
from head to foot in drab clothing.  No doubt Europe was glad to be rid of them.

thanks fazzel!! i hope i don't come across as sounding anti anyone American, it is just how this thread deviated, and the realisation that traditional art would be banned here, it just seems quite alien to me!! i really hope this doesn't migrate to Europe as i don't think there are enough fig leafs to go round!!!

Threads deviate. Those of us that cause that are deviants. Wait a minute... That didn't come out right...

No, vince3, we understand.  Just hope some over-zealous busybody at Paypal doesn't start pushing R'osity to remove all the boobies either.  Given the plethora of NViTwS, the traffic here would probably drop 90% :tt2:

well this got sort of off track didn't it?,
I will just post images at my own site,since I run it and have set rules that make ME and most of my members happy.
I don't have a store,therefore no need to be under the thumb of the mighty paypal gods
threatening to shut me down if I don't comply with them. :tt2:

have fun with the rest of this thread...lol

The3dZone

Quote - I interned with the Probation Department's Sex Offender Unit In Ft. Worth while working on my degree. One of the things that was pointed out by the head of the unit was that it was absolutely normal for males to be physically attracted to post-pubescent females. That was not 'deviant' in any way. The attraction wasn't deviant, but acting on that attraction was clearly illegal and criminal. 

Thank you, for a moment of sanity in the latest "kids are obscene" rant.
Mick

Just a quick note on the Paypal Boogey. I've heard the crypto-Taliban invoke Paypal and even Visa as the old meanies who won't let them be reasonable. It's obviously baloney, if you just think about it. Porn sites use Visa, and you can use your Paypal account at Amazon, where one of the hot items right now is Alan Moore's Lost Girls, which is about pre-adult sex. The locals just don't want to take the heat.

I'm passionate about prosecuting child abuse, unswayed by the rationalizations of pedophiles, and a firm believer in the sexuality of children. After all, I was one.

M

Quote - traditional art it would seem, if posted here would be removed and warnings/ban would follow!!! just natural nudity!! nothing at all to do with sex!!

Yep, unfortunately that is the case. It's a very sad situation over on this side of the ocean.  I saw on the news a few days ago that an art teacher was facing disciplinary action for having taken his students on a field trip to the art gallery and exposing them to nudity, images and statues in question were "the classics".

Quote - i would have to conclude that in America all nudity is somehow linked to sex or sexual urges!! i guess things are just different here in Europe where you can be nude and it can have nothing to do with sex whatsoever!! most people i have known wouldn't think to look twice at someone(whatever their age) if they were nude on a beach or something, because it is just natural!! it might raise an eyebrow or two if there were sex involved, but if someone is just sunbathing why would it bother you!!

If by "America" you mean "North America", I can say that not all of us over here are prudes. Some of us even do the nude beach thing, and I have always been more comfortable unclothed than wearing clothing.  

Where I live in Canada it's perfectly 100% legal for a woman to go topless even in the heart of downtown. Unfortunately I haven't been witness to any taking that privilege up because of all the piggish comments that would come their way by those who act like they've never seen a woman's chest before.  I know I would be outside without my top if attitudes were different over here.

I am frequently told by my overseas friends that I would fit very well into a European culture because of my similar beliefs and ideals. I see nothing wrong with non sexual nudity. 

We are born into this world nude and  rather than teaching our children to embrace their bodies the first thing we do is rush them away and bundle them up in clothing and a blanket and as they grow we tell them to keep covered and that "it's not right" or "it's indecent" or any number of other things that causes low self esteem and the belief that the nude body is something to be ashamed of. No wonder there are so many perverts in the world, we as a society create them through  our prudish morals and beliefs that we instill in our children from birth.

How many actualy asked paypall anyway? They are not the ones sitting here looking at the images. That looks to me like a red herring. This just looks like extreme social aversion to the concept of "cute" and a false belief adults can not be cute. Guess what? The Japanese make liberal use of "cute" adult characters. It floods all their illustrations in anime and manga. Guess what else? Aiko is a anime and manga character. I have doubts things here are going to get fixed anytime soon.

whilst i abhore any kind of child porno i find nothing wrong with what 3dzone did. i always thought chid porn showed intent. to say a faery is child porn seems odd to me. to stop a picture purely on the basis of nudity also seems odd. but rules are rules. what i find amuzing is that people who ranted about censorship accept it here yet cry wolf when a law is passed. 3d didn't accept the censorship rules here re galleries and took his work else where. upto now he's the only one i've seen do it....i have to say though that if a rule is so ambiguous as to make the mods say...send us a pic and we'll vet it before you post it in a gallery then it needs defining......if it can't be defined then it's be a silly rule....that one mod interpretation can be different from anothers also makes it a silly rule.......in fact when that happens it stops being a rule and becomes a personal preference. whilst i hope all in here would be disgusted if children were dipicted as sex objects i'm pretty certain that a cherub, toon or faery wouldn't to any sane adult be cause for alarm.....in fact i would think that such images would be viewed in an opposite way.......art is art is art and though certain boundries have to be drawn for the sake of decency and as someone stated paypal and the buck......i doubt any credit card company or payment system would pull out because of an image of a faery or two.

i've also seen it said that these are the rules so live with it....well yes they are the rules but that doesn't mean the community can't try and change them through discussions like this. in fact if a communities membership feels a certain rule is silly or wrong this is in fact the only logical way of trying to change it. if it get that a rule becomes so strict as to hinder a large percentage of what people do rendo will find themselves losing not only members but cash. if that happens , what paypal think won't be a problem....to casually sweep what members think aside in an autocratic way will only cause rendo harm in the long run.......to lock down discussions is something i see here as well. things like...this is going off topic or this is getting political so i'm closing the thread down.......now that is real censorship yet no one says anything about it. jmo of course

billy

Quote - whilst i abhore any kind of child porno i find nothing wrong with what 3dzone did. i always thought chid porn showed intent. to say a faery is child porn seems odd to me. to stop a picture purely on the basis of nudity also seems odd. but rules are rules. what i find amuzing is that people who ranted about censorship accept it here yet cry wolf when a law is passed. 3d didn't accept the censorship rules here re galleries and took his work else where. upto now he's the only one i've seen do it....i have to say though that if a rule is so ambiguous as to make the mods say...send us a pic and we'll vet it before you post it in a gallery then it needs defining......if it can't be defined then it's be a silly rule....that one mod interpretation can be different from anothers also makes it a silly rule.......in fact when that happens it stops being a rule and becomes a personal preference. whilst i hope all in here would be disgusted if children were dipicted as sex objects i'm pretty certain that a cherub, toon or faery wouldn't to any sane adult be cause for alarm.....in fact i would think that such images would be viewed in an opposite way.......art is art is art and though certain boundries have to be drawn for the sake of decency and as someone stated paypal and the buck......i doubt any credit card company or payment system would pull out because of an image of a faery or two.

i've also seen it said that these are the rules so live with it....well yes they are the rules but that doesn't mean the community can't try and change them through discussions like this. in fact if a communities membership feels a certain rule is silly or wrong this is in fact the only logical way of trying to change it. if it get that a rule becomes so strict as to hinder a large percentage of what people do rendo will find themselves losing not only members but cash. if that happens , what paypal think won't be a problem....to casually sweep what members think aside in an autocratic way will only cause rendo harm in the long run.......to lock down discussions is something i see here as well. things like...this is going off topic or this is getting political so i'm closing the thread down.......now that is real censorship yet no one says anything about it. jmo of course

billy

A very well thought out and articulated post that bears repeating so I quoted it in it's entirety.

in Rendo's and the mods who removed my images defense,they did NOT say it was child porn,just underaged nudity ,meaning that they viewed the character to be under 18.
they didn't claim the image was distastful or in the least bit sexual,because it wasn't at all,just nude and underaged.

I just wanted to point that out,since this thread has lingered to the child porn issue  :0)

In the eyes of the law "kiddie porn" is defined as pictures of nude children, sexual acts or not.

thats why i said stopping a pic on the basis of nudity relating to age and style..ie faey or toon etc

billy

actually acadia, if i take a pic of my grandson in his b/day suit and put it in my website under family pics i'm not breaking the law. there has tp be some form of intent...to own pics of naked kids that you have no knowledge of or a collection of kiddy pic nudes would show intent. thats why we never hear of anyone getting done for one pic...very hard to prove etc

billy

Billy

"what i find amuzing is that people who ranted about censorship accept it here yet cry wolf when a law is passed. 3d didn't accept the censorship rules here re galleries and took his work else where. upto now he's the only one i've seen do it...."

Not true- My main gallery isn't here- I did also remove my entire gallery at one time. The primary gallery is at rendervisions (now knowen as theartdoor.com).

The ONLY reason I added a few (generic) pictures here is for my store, Got to have a couple here just to get some sales. But I also seldom shop here either, not till something changes!

Many of us have done this- we do not accept blindly illogical rules. So we continue to talk and presuade. Some day in Isreal ya know :)

accepted geoegress just trying to state a point about censorship and it backfired and kicked my ass hehe i hope you understood the intent though

 

billy

Quote - In the eyes of the law "kiddie porn" is defined as pictures of nude children, sexual acts or not.

um, not true. or rather not exactly true. by the letter of the law. nude children are not "kiddie porn" however that does not mean you will not be arrested, investigated, and slandered in the process of being acquitted. Arrests are front page news, retractions you will have to search for.

Quote - Just a quick note on the Paypal Boogey. I've heard the crypto-Taliban invoke Paypal and even Visa as the old meanies who won't let them be reasonable.

It wouldn't surprise me if many of the sites are letting Paypal take the flak for the nude rules that may or may not be prompted by Paypal.
 

as for visa

From what i understand, Visa charges much higher rates for "adult" sites because the higher incidents of fraud. It is in most websites interest to not get pushed into that rate bracket.

as for amazon. their volume gives them a lot of negotiating power, i imagine they can "get away" with much more than a Poser site could.

I don't see how PayPal's "jurisdiction" extends beyond that of the store where merchandise is sold - where a PayPal transaction would be involved.  Aren't the galleries and forum separate areas from the store?  I mean, enforce whatever rule you'd like to - it's your site and it's privately owned and operated - but why cite PayPal as a fault?

Don't get me wrong, if you are going for a PG-13 audience then by all means - that's smurfy!  I prefer my own site to be family friendly.  If I felt the need to display lots of nudes and such, I'd open a separate site for that.  Maybe Rendo should consider such an idea.

Quote - No wonder there are so many perverts in the world, we as a society create them through  our prudish morals and beliefs that we instill in our children from birth.

Amen. And now instead of "protecting them" from being disgusting, we excuse it as "protecting them" from being seduced. But it boils down to the same thing. Naked children are obscene.

M

Paypal setting the rules seems like setting the cart before the horse to me, it is the people posting pictures who buy stuff here who keep the forums and galleries etc going, without customers there could be no site or paypal here.

 

Quote - The bad thing with 3D art is.........you can't just get a model release form for the model, because they're just a bunch of code. 

No, but maybe you could for her skin.  I look very young for my age.  I'm 32 and get carded to buy flipping lottery tickets.  (For which you only have to be 18 in Ohio.)  What if I were to make an image map for Aiko, based on photos of myself.  Then sign a model release form.  No one could say Aiko was under 18 since her skin texture was clearly created from a 32 year old model.

Luna Faye