Firstly, I became sexually active in a sex-positive, kink-centric community, and so have been raised with the philosophy that so long as all participants are adults (and buts safety constraints on harm caused so no-one regularly has to go to the ER).
But I am unusually tolerant of unusual kinks and have jealousy issues of inclusion, rather than limiting access. My psychologist a decade ago would attribute it to being neuralspicy. Also during the Iraq war and the CIA extrajudicial detention and torture program, I freaked out and started a (personal) dive into moral philosophy, which explores the intersectionality (or rather the separation) between what we _reason _out is moral or proper (e.g. equality, liberty) and what we feel is moral or proper (e.g. purity, obedience)
One of the notable studies regards the story of Julie and Mark (in short, they’re blood siblings, go on a camping trip, have sex and decide it was a good experience but not worth repeating) and subjects told this story would go to great lengths to rationalize their disapproval of the siblings’ behavior in the story. This divergence between reasoned ethics and intuitive ethics runs thick through human culture, informing business practices like RTO mandates, bullshit jobs and crunching development teams (overworking them to meet deadlines, which kills their productivity to well below non-crunch levels)
So yes. People freak out about age play and lolicon, about Rule 34 featuring the Simpsons kids, about fictional bestiality, …and about anthros with species-correct genitals, even if the characters are otherwise clearly consenting adults. Reasonably, these should all be protected by free speech, and efforts to limit speech always extend into non-sexual matters such as trans issues and queer culture, so that talking about UHaul Lesbians could soon become restricted or even criminal in the US.
I think species-correct genitalia and lolicon material should be legal and accepted as unrestricted content, but I also understand as a species, we will have to further develop our society so that it is less reactive to moral panics (also to political power consolidation) before marginalized content can be freely distributed, or, for that matter, all pervs and queers can come fully out of the closet.
And as a footnote, just as the autocratic purges come for the marginalized, the politically far-left and political enemies before cutting into larger demographics, autocratic censorship efforts come first for kink and queer content then general porn, then history and philosophy, and then language and grammar. Knitting Cult Lady, in her discussions of cult systems of control, discusses use of language to control the flock among her many topics.
Firstly, I became sexually active in a sex-positive, kink-centric community, and so have been raised with the philosophy that so long as all participants are adults (and buts safety constraints on harm caused so no-one regularly has to go to the ER).
But I am unusually tolerant of unusual kinks and have jealousy issues of inclusion, rather than limiting access. My psychologist a decade ago would attribute it to being neuralspicy. Also during the Iraq war and the CIA extrajudicial detention and torture program, I freaked out and started a (personal) dive into moral philosophy, which explores the intersectionality (or rather the separation) between what we _reason _out is moral or proper (e.g. equality, liberty) and what we feel is moral or proper (e.g. purity, obedience)
One of the notable studies regards the story of Julie and Mark (in short, they’re blood siblings, go on a camping trip, have sex and decide it was a good experience but not worth repeating) and subjects told this story would go to great lengths to rationalize their disapproval of the siblings’ behavior in the story. This divergence between reasoned ethics and intuitive ethics runs thick through human culture, informing business practices like RTO mandates, bullshit jobs and crunching development teams (overworking them to meet deadlines, which kills their productivity to well below non-crunch levels)
So yes. People freak out about age play and lolicon, about Rule 34 featuring the Simpsons kids, about fictional bestiality, …and about anthros with species-correct genitals, even if the characters are otherwise clearly consenting adults. Reasonably, these should all be protected by free speech, and efforts to limit speech always extend into non-sexual matters such as trans issues and queer culture, so that talking about UHaul Lesbians could soon become restricted or even criminal in the US.
I think species-correct genitalia and lolicon material should be legal and accepted as unrestricted content, but I also understand as a species, we will have to further develop our society so that it is less reactive to moral panics (also to political power consolidation) before marginalized content can be freely distributed, or, for that matter, all pervs and queers can come fully out of the closet.
And as a footnote, just as the autocratic purges come for the marginalized, the politically far-left and political enemies before cutting into larger demographics, autocratic censorship efforts come first for kink and queer content then general porn, then history and philosophy, and then language and grammar. Knitting Cult Lady, in her discussions of cult systems of control, discusses use of language to control the flock among her many topics.