@XenoBladeX37645 said in The censorship on being short should be removed.:

@IfrianMMO I dont mind continuing as long as I need to because I stand firm by my belief that what something looks like and what something is are not the same. One thing I want to say is that I dont appreciate you calling me a pedo dude. That was uncalled for

I do not feel it was uncalled for at all, and i still think you are a massive creep, and i feel the same about the people who morally side with you and defend some of the points that you have made in the past.

You did absolutely nothing in the last 20 pages to change my mind, not that i expect you to care, mind me.

You think i am a snowflake and a SJW, and i think you are all morally bankrupt, that is the truth of the situation.

Feel free to keep patting your own backs and claiming we are just an uppity minority, if you will, i will let history herself to be the judge or who the minority truly was, and about how things are going to be in the future.

I am out of this thread though, i tire of this pointless banter, in the end, you will have to deal with a censored PSO2.

And mark my words when i tell you, that it will not be the last.

Muting the thread and blocking the creepiest users, have fun.

@Zenny said in The censorship on being short should be removed.:

This is why everyone hates SJW and karens. They take an issue that is really not an issue to normal people and amplify it x1000. It's what we see here in regards to the height slider.

Lets be realistic here. You can already make small characters in bikinis etc. A minor change to the height slider isn't going to change that nor is it going to make people leave. These people who are pro censorship are still playing and characters 10cm less isn't going to change that. Basically arguing for censorship for no reason but to deny people the same game as Japan.

You have people in this thread and others trying to assume the worst people because they are anti censorship on this. These people literally live in a bubble. Imagine encapsulating yourself with this mindset. The reality is there are no "creeps" or "pedophiles" playing PSO2. Nobody is making a small character and getting off to it when they put on a bikini. It just doesn't happen.

You cannot compare kids IRL being sexualized to a small character in a video game in the same format. They are not the same thing.

Some of you people need to actually direct your arguments at things that are ACTUAL issues like the media propping up highly sexualized child drag queens rather than being pro censorship for a non issue. Don't believe it? Google "Desmond "Desi" Napoles". This shit is grounds for actual outrage and is completely disgusting. This shit reeks of hypocrisy from America. They seem to have a problem with small video game characters that don't even exist in reality but a highly sexualized child drag queen? That's perfectly fine!

I know that this may be a wild concept to you, but one can both outrage and fight against real life problems and still oppose problematic content in fiction, it´s not either one or the other.

@XenoBladeX37645 said in The censorship on being short should be removed.:

@IfrianMMO yet at this point its technically up to the player to decide the age since we dont have one hence the ability to customize as we see fit, so if i decided to make a min height newman thats flat as cardboard and stick her in a bikini but classify her as an adult, thats fair game UNTIL the game states how old we are. Also none of the supporting cast are sexualized in the story so that point doesnt hold here.

You are right that the supporting cast is not sexualized in PSO2, at least mostly, but for the love of god do not play PSO2ES or IDOLA PHANTASY STAR because that is a whole new world of "This is go getting censored when it comes to the West as Idola is"

Seriously, some of the Weaponoids, summer event characters, and apparently even Daimakuras that are being offered right now, i highly doubt we are going to see in our lands, but that is just a hunch.

I do not agree that making a lewdieloli is okay but we will not agree on that so i will not butt heads with you on that matter further as i am sure you as as tired as i am of doing just that.

@Yin said in The censorship on being short should be removed.:

@IfrianMMO said in The censorship on being short should be removed.:

By the way, and as a side note, we are yet to prove that our characters are adults.

It is true that the specific age of our character is not stated in-game but we know that Alfin is 16 and Matoi is 18.

We also know we are from the same ship as Alfin, the same generation as Alfin, and that Matoi, as Klariskrays was active in ARKS before us.

We also know that the age of service for ARKS is 16.

Now, correct me if i am wrong but this means that Matoi is older than us, so our character, already by default, cannot be 18 which makes them a minor, so all that really matters is whether we are 16 or 17, but being on Alfin´s same class makes us 16.

It would also make sense as that is the age of all the Arks of our generation, not just Alfin.

Thoughts on that?

First off, nowhere in the game does it state the age of any character. Second, there is a 2.5 year gap between ep 3 and 4. So if we go based off of that and with the assumption that your claims are correct then all the main cast from ep 3 are over 18 from ep 4 onward.

Actually, the ages of the characters were stated in other media surrounding PSO2 in JP and have been well known for ages, at least their ages pre-time skip, and no, i am not going to spend hours finding and translating every single piece of JP evidence off old interviews, character cards, drama CD and magazines just for you to go "yeah well but what about the time skip"

Feel free to consult the wikis/websites or asking anyone JP relevant in AIDA´s discord if you want, though. They have an entire channel dedicated to lore and spoilers.

Furthermore, remember that many years passed IRL before the time-skip was inserted into the game so this means that if my claims are correct, then the lewd-lolis were still wrong for a number of years until the end of EP-3

@XenoBladeX37645 said in The censorship on being short should be removed.:

@ZorokiHanuke said in The censorship on being short should be removed.:

@IfrianMMO Again, all we know is the time our player character joined the ARKS. Not their date of birth. How are we going to explain the old wrinkled avatars with mature voices? Are they all 16 years old?

THIS right here. This is a great point. How is that explained?

Ironically, this is precisely the point i was trying to bring to the table.

It is quite obvious that the reason why our character does not have a specific age (even if it´s easy to calculate if you know the lore) is because the character creator is meant to give you full freedom to look like and be as you want to be.

But this is precisely why i feel that using the "They are all adults, so it´s okay" defense is absurd.

Just like making an old, fat, wrinkled grandpa character is valid and that character has to be seen as such, then the same can be applied to the characters that are the extreme opposite.

i find it´s very dishonest to use the "age defense" for a specific fetish but then turn around and drop it when it´s convenient.

@XenoBladeX37645 said in The censorship on being short should be removed.:

@IfrianMMO someone can be the same age and older you know that right?

But we know she was klariskrays for years before we joined, so it cannot have been the same year.

I think a much better defense against this would be the time-skip that happens midway.

@XenoBladeX37645 said in The censorship on being short should be removed.:

@IfrianMMO thoughts? yes. Our age has not been stated so to assume on either end of the argument is moot

But we know Matoi is older than us and is 18 and we know how long she was Klariskrays for.

So it´s not really an assumption, the oldest we can be is 17, which still makes us a minor, does it not?

By the way, and as a side note, we are yet to prove that our characters are adults.

It is true that the specific age of our character is not stated in-game but we know that Alfin is 16 and Matoi is 18.

We also know we are from the same ship as Alfin, the same generation as Alfin, and that Matoi, as Klariskrays was active in ARKS before us.

We also know that the age of service for ARKS is 16.

Now, correct me if i am wrong but this means that Matoi is older than us, so our character, already by default, cannot be 18 which makes them a minor, so all that really matters is whether we are 16 or 17, but being on Alfin´s same class makes us 16.

It would also make sense as that is the age of all the Arks of our generation, not just Alfin.

Thoughts on that?

@Lemon-Sama said in The censorship on being short should be removed.:

@IfrianMMO Nobody here would've answered your obvious trap questions. You intentionally asked them with no positive outcome. Then you started arguing and throwing accusations for not taking said bait. Legally you can be sued for this, because paedophilia is a serious crime and a felony, and slander of a felony act is also a felony.

First of all, there are people who answered the question, such as @Archetype-Luna

Secondly, what you are stating is false, because the question was:

"Do you agree with the sexualization of canonically 16 years old characters?" YES/NO

Answering the question with a "No" such as, once again, @Archetype-Luna did, but also others during the general discussion, would have ended the conversation positively, which it did with Luna.

So no, it was not a "trap question" and there is proof of that.

If @XenoBladeX37645 had answered openly, i would have dropped it, like i dropped it with Luna.

@ZorokiHanuke said in The censorship on being short should be removed.:

At least I don't see any apparent red flags..

So yeah, while your suspicions are fair..

I feel like these two concepts do not marry all that well.

If there are no red flags about his behavior, then my suspicions have no reason to be, but if my suspicious are at least fair, and with my suspicions being what they are, then at least some minor red flag has to have been raised.

So not directly answering a question, as annoying as it may seem, does not initially (or shouldn't) draw any suspicions about what he likes or not.

I mean, if he just refused to answer the one question, you would be correct.

But you cannot forget that this was preceded and coupled with:

-Using the "Gamer´s Dilemma" which claims that "virtual pedophilia" is not bad because "Virtual in-game murdering" is not.

-Claiming sexualized and fetishized child-like characters did not bother him as long as they were not ACTUAL children

-Using "It´s a Japanese game" to defend reprehensible age brackets and content.

One cannot just take one of his statements and behaviours on it´s own and assume innocence without taking into account all the other factors and the way the person has been defending said content so adamantly for 20 pages by every stretch imaginable.

And sure, maybe you are right and he is not so much a creep as he is someone who just did not want to be led or "lose an argument" but either way it cannot be denied that his statements were at best, unorthodox.

@ZorokiHanuke said in The censorship on being short should be removed.:

@HarmlessSyan Yep. And this is the part where I feel the line was crossed multiple times. One thing is to say "nope, creeps could come it and ruin it". And I completely understand that. Which is different from saying "you are a creep for asking for what I'm against." Similar wording, different meanings.

Actually, if you read my very first post, it was much more friendly and i even stated that i did not think anyone in the thread was a creep or a pedo, which i truly believed, based on what had been stated so far, and stated why the censorship had to stay.

However, upon claiming that the "Lewd lolis of PSO2" were morally wrong, our friend @XenoBladeX37645 posed what is commonly known as "The Gamer´s Dilemma" to me.

The Gamer´s Dilemma basically states, that virtual crimes against children are not more morally reproachable than virtual crimes against adults, the most commonly used example, is that if virtual murder is okay (Grand Theft Auto) and we do not find it morally wrong, despite the fact that IRL we would find the act appalling and illegal, then by the same fashion, crimes against children should not be moralized.

This, to my point of view, was already weird and creepy, but it continued.

@XenoBladeX37645 Also claimed, that in PSO2JP, the lewd lolis never bothered him because to him, what is an actual child and what looks like a child are two different things, so as long as canonically ARKS are adults, those characters are okay.

After we went back and forth about the age of PSO2 characters, and i pointed out that canonically, most ARK characters are 16 or under, and that our character belongs canonically to their generation @XenoBladeX37645 claimed "It´s a Japanese game" and left it at that.

This, combined with the previous issue, made it quite suspicious.

Finally, when i asked people to just be clear and plain about their intentions, and simply state whether they agree with the sexualization of that specific age bracket, @XenoBladeX37645 refused to answer, and instead began claiming i accused him of being a pedo.

Yes, i did claim that people refusing to answer such a basic question were sketchy and that it was very telling, and i still think it is.

But the truth remains, that if he had simply clarified what he meant each time, as i asked him like 200 times and he refused to answer each time, this entire conversation and my suspicions about him would have never happened to begin with.

In short:

1. He proposed the gamer´s dilemma, which claims virtual underage fetish is not morally worse than virtual murder or crimes.

2. He stated that lewd lolis, no matter how chidified, did not bother him because one thing is an actual child and one thing is what looks like a child, and that it´s not the same to him

3. He answered "It´s a Japanese game" when i told him that Arks are 16 years or younger and that our character belongs to their generation, and pointed out how Western laws differ from Japanese´s 16 age of consent.

4. Refused to answer when asked if he thought the sexualization of said 16 yy old characters is okay.

I think there was a very good reason for me to feel suspicious about his intentions and character, and i maintain this now.

@Ranmaru said in The censorship on being short should be removed.:

@XenoBladeX37645 You never responded to my post by the way.

He does that a lot, as i am sure you noticed.