- Joined
- Feb 10, 2017
but why does your mission scope include perverse articles about perverse exploitative japanese child pornography
Nice b8 m8, but I do have a serious answer for that.
For instance, why would we have an article on say, "Boku no Pico"?
The same reason these people do:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boku_no_pico
Don't get me wrong. It'd be child porn if it were live action, and I find it morally reprehensible, but it remains legal to talk about it and in many jurisdictions to view, so disgusting as it may be, it's a work of media, and thus can be objectively discussed as a work of media.
To use an example I used in another thread, Gustave Flaubert's "Madame Bovary", was, at the time it was written, viewed with the same revulsion then as we would view Boku no Pico now, only it's topic was about a woman who discovers she enjoys an adultery fetish, which at the time it was written, was the height of disgusting for that time.
Flaubert was taken to court for "corrupting public morals" and WON a court case in which it stated art should be viewed for the sake of the art itself absent it's political or social value (insofar as it was legal to do so), and that so long as it was legal, discussion and perusal of art offensive to some was also legal, reprehensible or glorious as it might be otherwise in a moral sense.
We take the same view. Personally, I do not like either Boku no Pico nor Madame Bovary, the content within both run counter to my personal morals. Regardless, they exist, are media, and free to discuss and view legally, and our site mission is to not allow our political or social mores to compromise our discussion of media, and if that bothers anyone, so be it, we aren't bending our principles anymore than Flaubert did his, and he told the critics of his day to blow it out their ass and not read it or talk about it if it bothered them so much.
I take the same position as a creator of media myself, and unlike TV Tropes, which has to censor content because they willingly cuckolded themselves to their advertisement sponsors, we have no such restraint except what is imposed by law, and that's all we care about.