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

I'd like further investigation into ScrewYourself.Fan Works. Many of the works described seem to be primarily porn, some of which includes teenagers (like the Wizards of Waverly Place example). There's also a few mentions of romanticized pedophilia, like one of the Legend of Zelda entries talking about shotacon. To top it all off, one of the examples is from a Shadbase comic (though thankfully not linked).

I'm currently cleaning up the general examples for a new TLP, but there's a lot of lewd gunk that I don't want to carry over, or even remain on the original page.

Edited by mightymewtron on Mar 16th 2021 at 12:53:47 PM

Oh wow that's a lot of material. Shadman is a definite toss out. Shotacon Links too.

Everything else though, that's a question of shipping vs smutting.

A similar issue is MisterSeahorse.Fan Works.

Sorry about the previous red link, misspelled the namespace.

Edited by ccorb on Mar 16th 2021 at 7:41:51 AM

In the Fan Works there's

• There is a Code Geass slash fic where Zero and Suzaku are fighting over Lelouch's affections. The author has also written other stories involving Zero/Lelouch and has admitted in one of her other slash fics that FanFiction.Net to add Zero's name to the character list for the sole purpose of writing these types of fanfiction.

The fanfic link is dead. According to the URL it was The Enemy Of My Enemy Is My Friend. Can't seem to find the story anywhere.

Edited by DrPsyche on Mar 16th 2021 at 10:03:58 PM

You can delete it. If there's no proof the story existed besides a dead link, we have no other choise but to delete it.

Wayback Machine to the rescue!

Huh. I thought FF.net had robots.txt.

It does, but the Wayback Machine doesn't exclude websites with robots.txt by default anymore, since cybersquatters were adding robots.txt which retroactively excluded archived versions.

Futadom World Binding Sim looks like an obvious cut to me. Should I go ahead and flag it?

Seems sketchy to me.

Yeaah, that's absolutely just plain porn.

Like, the premise could have been about dodging the dicking until the end of the game, but judging by the gallery, nope. It's banging all the time.

Edited by Adannor on Mar 18th 2021 at 12:49:12 PM

Ok, it's reported.

Looked into it. Yeah, it's mostly porn. Devilhead.

So, there is a work that I have read recently that might deserve a page here on TV Tropes but which needs a look-over by 5P beforehand. Yes, I know that in the past I have argued against using 5P in this fashion; sue me.

Its title is Can You Spare a Quarter? and it exists in an old version on a website called Nifty and a complete one on another named PZA/ASSTR. Now I don't know much about Nifty but PZA/ASSTR is definitively dedicated to hosting paedobait stories ... but I think this particular one isn't paedopandering.

The story in either version is about a 12-year old boy named Jamie who has run away from his Abusive Parents and is now living on the streets, feeding himself through theft, begging and prostitution. He meets a man named Graham, a negotiator for a computer company and close to retirement, who decides to take the kid in. After a few weeks and encounters - some good and some not so good - the man obtains legal guardianship for the boy and eventually adopts him. There is also an epilogue written in first-person by Jamie and which ends with a Sudden Downer Ending.

This story doesn't feature any explicit sex - all of the sexual stuff happens offpage/in the backstory - as far as I can tell, but given the premise and webhost it's the paedobait rule that is the main issue, so I'll go in detail:

• While it's all in the backstory, it's pretty clear that Jamie was abused sexually (and more) by his parents and especially his father. Apparently they were using him as a Sex Slave and they get their comeuppance during the story. The kid has nightmares about his parents and is afraid of men who remind him of his father.
• After running away from home, the boy has been with men who give him food, a warm bed and sometimes a shower in exchange for sex. It's "consensual" in the sense that Jamie prefers that to being sent back to his (in his assessment even worse) parents by the Department of Child Disservices and to death by starvation/hypothermia, but only because it's the least bad option available. Again the sex is not described in detail - or even called such - but the story is clear that it's a painful, unpleasant and quite dangerous way to get food and a roof over the head.
• When the boy is first invited to stay with Graham, Jamie expects that the man will eventually expect sex in exchange for his hospitality. Thus ... see how I said above what Jamie's alternatives are? He does flirt a couple of times with Graham - there is a little detail here but not much, in my assessment not enough to cross over into paedopandering since the man stops him before Jamie gets too far. When Graham tries to begin a conversation on Jamie's life the boy breaks down in tears and in between sobs promises to Graham that he can take everything and won't disappoint him. Pretty clear to me that Jamie means sexually here.
• Graham takes Jamie to his home(s), but he's driven by altruism and perhaps a bit of parental instincts not by any kind of romantic or sexual desires. Ditto for the people - and animals - he introduces Jamie to.
• During the climax of the story Jamie is caught by his father, brutally beaten up and almost raped to death. It's Rape as Drama conveyed through Rape Discretion Shot, not rape pornography, and the only details we get are a doctor listing his injuries and what Graham sees when he finds the kid after the rape, and while it's not pretty it doesn't go into the wrong details.
• The Nifty version says that Graham is gay but the PZA/ASSTR version doesn't ... either way however his romantic/sexual desires never come up in the story, All Gays Are Pedophiles does not apply here. The epilogue strongly hints that Jamie himself is also homosexual but that too doesn't show during the main story and it never gets explicit.

So, I think that this story may pass muster here. I am not committed to writing a page for it as all kinds of Downer Ending are something I strongly dislike, but I wanted to know if folks think it would be compatible with 5P rules.

That sounds like the pedophilia and rape are strictly played for horror/drama, and aren't given enough detail to even be unintentionally arousing, so I'd imagine it passes for the same reasons as something like Mysterious Skin or (presumably) With Pearl and Ruby Glowing.

For the sake of completeness, there is a third version which I haven't read in any depth, although it looks identical to the PZA/ASSTR version. I have only read the PZA/ASSTR version top-to-bottom, but it doesn't seem like the Nifty version is very different in terms of focus, so I expect all versions to end up with the same 5P verdict.

(For the record, all the links are to text-only websites that don't run ads, so they are SFW although I can't speak of the other works on the websites)

Seems fine. Not porn nor pedo stuff.

OK, unless there are last minute objections I'll write something up over the next few days.

And here we go. Note that I've flagged it to formalize whatever 5P verdict comes up.

So...I want to make an article about the infamous bomb BMX XXX. The thing is, you could argue the game is at least slightly porny enough to not warrant an article, but it's rated M, and there's only just nudity and no sex (though you do see dogs doing it). I want to make an article about it to cover its history and how it ended up being a disaster in all ways, so would that be okay?

For what it's worth, I don't think any of the characters in the game are underage (which technically means BMX XXX is better than The Guy Game. Think about that.)

Edited by FromtheWordsofBR on Mar 22nd 2021 at 6:27:50 AM

Think about what? Are you implying its somehow an oddity that one cheesy NSFW game is better than another cheesy NSFW game because it isn't pedo-pandering?

Sorry. That just got on my nerves.

I think their "technically" bit was because The Guy Game, unlike a lot of weird loli games that tend to get cut here, isn't pedo-pandering on purpose since the issue was one of the girls who flashed her boobies being seventeen instead of college-aged as they assumed, but like, the fact they enlisted random girls to flash their boobies for a porny trivia game without checking their ages that closely is still gross. And it doesn't make the game any less illegal. From what I can guess, BMX XXX has worse graphics and gameplay but at least doesn't have child porn.

Edited by mightymewtron on Mar 22nd 2021 at 9:50:47 AM

Yeah, it was a dumb joke about how BMX XXX at least doesn't have CP in it :|

Like somebody said in the ATT thread, the bigger problem in this case would more be that "works where the page only exists so people can make fun of it" is not a category we want to expand.

Remember that there is (or at least should be) a difference between "a work is best known for Troubled Production or some other production faults to the degree that it's worth documenting for the sake of media history" and "a work page only exists cuz we wanna make fun of it."