i dont think patreon basd themself on the physic alone.
The crazy thing is if you replace 'Patreon' with 'America' you would have a very valid comment about the laws that both Patreon & Paypal are trying to stay on the right side of. I'm not trying to derail the thread here, but if you look up the laws on the so called Obscene Materials in the U.S. you'll come across something called the Miller Test, the wording of which would probably remind you of a certain part of Patreon's terms & conditions. Because, you know, having actual definitions in your laws is just too much work.
As it's been explained, totally new game.
That's the kind of stuff I was referring to. Laws on pornography, especially if involving minors, have broad and general definitions usually because the legislator can't afford to spend time and effort to define every possible stuff porn-makers might concoct. A casistic approach would mean that the law would lag behind the porn industry and too narrow definitions would mean loopholes through which exploitation of minors could continue.
As been said by Boomatica, the Patreon team for this kind of stuff has been preliminaryly asked about it and has given the green light, but suggested the character to be censored in images to avoid people reporting it nonetheless.
that depend of the country i guess.. i always find funny that "college" use in amrica and else ^^
Height is not very indicative of age. I know people whom in middle school were higher than me in my adulthood...
yeah well.. a small body with small tits and big head.. its always the same "technic" used by game devs to avoid troubles with that while giving Loli stuff away.
Yep, but breast size is not indicative of age, so small breasts doesn't mean anything per se. In this case the character's head relative to her legs and arm length is totally not underage, her head is not relatively big. She has a petite body, but she isn't a loli by a long shot.
Ah cwap. Forgot for a while that the reason RIC got shelved was an age issue rather than an incest one. Especially as they fall under different laws. So first, I understand your point and actually agree with it. Though they could stand for a bit of an updating (I recall Lewdgamer having an article on the legality of fictional Lolis in games/manga and looked at cases of actual prosecution in the US), the laws on the depiction of minors is defined enough, albeit in generalist legal terms.
I believe the Australian Government shares that view, if the Internet is to be believed.
They look nowhere like 12 years old.
Oh, I don't know enough US legislation, so your reference to the Miller Test actually taught me something!Ah cwap. Forgot for a while that the reason RIC got shelved was an age issue rather than an incest one. Especially as they fall under different laws. So first, I understand your point and actually agree with it. Though they could stand for a bit of an updating (I recall Lewdgamer having an article on the legality of fictional Lolis in games/manga and looked at cases of actual prosecution in the US), the laws on the depiction of minors is defined enough, albeit in generalist legal terms.
The point I was bringing up (quite badly) was on the other side of the coin, where things are murkier.
The laws where incest & the rest of the 'fringe' (ie: what some would call fun) stuff falls under is a different situation, as I wasn't commenting on the definition of Obscene Materials being too vague. I was commenting on how there isn't an actual definition set up, so to say it's broad is more than an understatement. When the 'definition' is a mini-questionaire with terms like "Average Person" and "Community Standard" it really is pretty arbitrary depending on the age and sex looking at it, to paraphrase ReJoe in a way. Still, pardon me for any confusion I caused.
Also, as much as I'm trying to resist, I simply can't go without commenting on this:
I believe the Australian Government shares that view, if the Internet is to be believed.
... )
Nope, they don't. As you exemplified, they make assumption of age, not age itself.
Uhm......
..
Huh. If I was actually informative for once I think I'll consider that my Stopped Clock post and saunter off then, can't go screwing it up by sticking around. Also thanks for the clarification as well, I keep forgetting that the way a law is worded is often nonsensical at first, but starts to make sense if you step back and think of it.
