The Place for Purging Porn and Pedo-Pandering (AKA P5 flag evaluations)

We had a vandal blank the article for supposedly being pedobait, which called it to our attention as mods. Based on the description and examples, it appears as if the adult male protagonist gets his pick of nubile young girls from Medieval times, taking advantage of the fact that there was no such thing as an age of consent. I don't think any of us have read it, but on the basis of that description we decided to flag it to get it looked at.

edited 14th Aug '12 12:01:48 PM by Fighteer

Surely the P5 have blasted works for less than that.

Even though Ultimate Girls show girls who look around 16 except for the flat chested girl it does not go even near of what pedo-something. The flat chested girl is the one that is the problematic that scratches the border between what is allowed or not. I believe this is allowed by the rules. Personally this is a: just watch, enjoy and don't think much about it.

edited 14th Aug '12 12:02:03 PM by brunoais

Ages of consent aren't important. The 12-year old person's sex in Cross Time Engineer is the issue. I think I've found a free download on planetorganics. but I am not sure if it's legal.

Amazon's page gives no mention of a sex scene in Cross Time Engineer. One review there says there are references but nothing explicit so I'd say it's offtext.

This other site discusses the issue a bit and also that it's Deliberate Values Dissonance.

edited 14th Aug '12 12:12:38 PM by SeptimusHeap

The fact that Time Engineer is in the title to me sounds like some guy from the present/future is going back to exploit that, though.

The author may have had that in mind, but the character himself went back in time accidentally.

(Note: The only reason I'm commenting on this as opposed to any other work is because I looked into it. Don't take my participation as meaning anything in particular.)

edited 14th Aug '12 12:32:34 PM by Fighteer

It will probably come down to whether the relationships in question are portrayed as a thing that happens because of the time period the book is set in, or if it's portrayed as a pro-pedophilic fantasy.

There’s a lot of sex in The Cross-Time Engineer (and even more in later books), though it’s never of a graphic or particularly vulgar sort. Its most disturbing attribute is that it involves 30-something Conrad hopping into bed with one or more girls as young as 14. This is distasteful to us, and it’s easy to turn out discomfort and wrath on Frankowski, assuming that he’s simply a perverted old man fantasizing about swiving barely-pubescent girls. In his defense, however, Frankowski was attempting historical accuracy in this regard, when women were married (before or after sexual activity) as young as 14 years of age, usually with a somewhat older male. None of Frankowski’s other books, dealing with more modern timelines, contain any indications that he’s some sort of sexual deviant. None of this is to say, of course, that Frankowski’s writing in this regard wasn’t ridiculous. In a move very much in keeping with the accusations of wish-fulfillment fantasy, most or all of the women (or girls) in The Cross-Time Engineer are as slutty as he can write them; they are not only exhibitionists but nymphomaniacs as well, jumping two or three at a time into the bed of belted knights. is what the second site has to say.

Yes, but still. Irrelevant info, so deleted.

edited 14th Aug '12 12:53:59 PM by SeptimusHeap

For our purposes, it's all equal.

Admin (read: owner) fiat, so take it up with him.

Removing pedopandering isn't about Google, The Fast One just doesn't want it on the site. I'm not a fan of bowdlerizing the wiki either, but what can you do?

(Oops, ninja'd.)

edited 14th Aug '12 3:33:21 PM by InsanityPrelude

Bossman doesn't want such content on his site. Simple as that.

This ain't the place to discuss it. We've been over this plenty of times and we ain't having this derail again. Discuss works under evaluation, or ask if something needs to be evaluated, but don't complain about wiki policy.

edited 14th Aug '12 3:37:09 PM by tdgoodrich1

Seriously, this isn't the "Let's Complain About the Content Policy and/or the P5" thread. Leave such off-topic nonsense at the door before you post.

I've already asked for the Welcome PM to contain such a request to leave opinions at the door. Now, are there other shows to discuss?

Could we perhaps change the name of the topic? "About Content Violation Discussions" does sound like a place to ask questions about our policy.

Yes. This entry on the page for The Cross Time Engineer has me a little concerned:

To anyone who's familiar with this book, what's the deal with this?

@Edit: De-spoiled for ease of use.

edited 14th Aug '12 4:06:03 PM by Komodin

Expanding on that, do we know which volume? That specific incident may wind up being the tipping point of sorts.

Would you mind de-spoilering for ease of reading?

edited 14th Aug '12 3:48:00 PM by tdgoodrich1

Google ain't yielding much; even Wikipedia failed me. I did find this. It mentions an underage whore (direct quote) in the review, but no other details.

EDIT: I finally found something relevant. And rather damning. Reviewer name is John.

"My other reason for unease is also the reason I'll not be reading further books in the series. Conrad spends a lot of his time at Okoitz boffing, usually but not always singly, the "handmaidens" kept around the castle by Count Lambert for this use by himself and his guests. That it's all a bit masturbatory is forgivable. The trouble is that these wenches, who're essentially paid servants and unpaid harlots, are underage — and not just trivially so: they're 14. On discovering, early on, quite how young his bedmates are, Conrad has a minor crisis of conscience, confesses to a priest, etc., but then tells himself that in 13th-century Poland 14 was a marriageable age, after all, ho ho, and carries on boffing. This really unsettles me. I don't think the "marriageable age" argument washes. In terms of a time traveller from the 20th century, those girls are mere adolescents — in fact, Conrad occasionally remarks on the schoolgirlishness of his favourite underage mistress — and those are surely the terms in which said traveller must judge his own actions. That what he's doing is accepted as just dandy by the people among whom he's arrived is not, I think, ethically relevant: had Conrad landed among a thuggee band in 18th-century India, would it have been all right for him to rob and murder innocent strangers? And the odd thing about this element of the book is the complete unnecessariness of the pedophilia: I can't imagine any reader batting an eyelid at the historical implausibility (if any) had the girls been described as 16 or 17 years old, making them safely over the age of consent in the UK and, I assume, in the 20th-century Poland Conrad came from. As I say, this aspect meant the book left an unpleasant taste in my mouth."

edited 14th Aug '12 4:06:25 PM by GameChainsaw

Yeah, that's sounding more "pro-pedo fantasy" than "just a thing that happens due to the time period".

Agreed. Devilhead.

New flag: Webcomic.Dolan. You guys know the drill. What should we know?

Update: Doesn't look like something we need to evaluate. Just Stylistic Suck webcomic featuring various cartoon characters doing terrible things to each other. When they are sexual, it's more black comedy than titillating. In fact, I sincerely doubt anyone would get off to the art. Zapped.

edited 14th Aug '12 5:53:28 PM by tdgoodrich1

It's just a shitty webcomic that's got massive Memetic Mutation only because of how terrible and "exploitable" the artwork is. Nothing remotely pornographic about it. Zap it off the list and move on.

edited 14th Aug '12 5:53:19 PM by Raidouthe21st

Agreed; I gave it a devilhead, too.

Anyone remember when this thread was specifically for policy discussion, and talking about individual works was verboten here?

Anyway, I do think that Yuan's suggestion is a good one, and we should split off the "general Content Violations discussion" to a separate thread.