digibutter.nerr

[Goron Mask]

http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa218/Shadicnova69/dR97093-iaza_cOCK57085.gif

THAT


THAT IS NOT PORNOGRAPHY


THAT IS DR.COCK


DR. COCK IS A FICTIONAL MEGA MAN ORIGINAL CHARACTER WITH A PENIS HEAD

JUST BECAUSE YOU GUYS GET A HARD ON FROM IT DOESN'T MEAN IT'S PORNOGRAPHY, HELL I GET HARD FROM WATCHING I-CARLY, IS THAT PORN? WOULD I GET TO RESTRICTED FOR POSTING A PICTURE OF I-CARLY? I REFUSE TO DEAL WITH THIS RESTRICTION FAGGOTRY WHEN CENSOR BREAKING AND SPAM IS AFOOT...I'M NOT GONNA LET AN INACTIVE MOD SHOW UP AND BRING ME DOWN FOR POSTING A FUNNY PICTURE

NO FUCK YOU GUYS, UNRESTRICT ME NOW

[Francis]

It may or may not be pornography, depending on the definition. Pornography is defined as being "Sexually explicit" material. "Sexually" means relating to sex or sex organs. "Explicit" means clear and direct.
This is clearly a photo of a penis, or at least is intended to be belived to be a photo of penis. So I would say it fits the definition.

Regardless of if it is pornography or not... now matter how you dress it up, it is a photo of penis. which we do not want

[Goron Mask]

If it was sexual I would've have made it sexual, if it was explicit it wouldn't be dressed up. Just because Dr. Cock clearly has a penis for a head does not make it sexually explicit, if that was the case then anything resembling anything "sexual" would be an offense.

Meaning we should restrict everyone that posts anything that looks like a sexual organ just because it's inferring something sexual.

Lets move on to how such morals play among society

A boy is in 7th grade, he spends his days in study hall doodling vaginas and giggling like a mad man. One day the study hall teacher takes away his paper and gives him a detention, even though it doesn't harm a single soul.

Or better yet

A boy is in his 10th grade Health class learning about how sexual organs and such work...he's mentally scarred for life and he tells his parents about what he has learned. The parents happen to be very Christian and decide to sue the school district. The family wins the case and the school pays them a large fee of $3000 which could've been used to buy buy better books and learning tools.

And all this over something that you infer to as "sexual", does that really make sense to you Francis? As a leader of a forum who takes after a group of angsty perverted teenagers I'd think you'd know the difference between an amusing photoshopped picture and something being sexually explicit. Or don't you?

[Francis]

I repeat... Regardless of if it is pornography or not, it is a photo of penis, which is not allowed.

Like you said, I am the leader of the forum. I am responsible for how it is percieved, and I do not want it to be known as a place where people see penises. It doesn't matter if I find it amusing, because I have to take everyone's opinions into play, including those of random passersby. Least common denominator wins.

[Goron Mask]

But it isn't a photo of a penis, it's a photo of a man with a head that happens to be a penis, if you examined the picture you would see that there are no testicles, theres arms, legs, labcoat, and a head that happens to be a penis. Therefore it is not a penis, it is a person with a head that happens to be a penis.

[Super Slim]

I can stick my finger up a vagina, but it's fine to post a picture of my hand.