Search
(Supports wildcard *)Copyright
- ? digimon 710
Character
- ? gatomon 40
- ? kari kamiya 189
- ? mimi tachikawa 60
- ? sora takenouchi 65
- ? yolei inoue 52
Artist
- ? bbmbbf 84
- ? palcomix 79
General
- ? breasts 104873
- ? brown hair 29653
- ? glasses 10251
- ? large breasts 58671
- ? long hair 58528
- ? multiple girls 15901
- ? orange hair 5897
- ? panties 8476
- ? pink hair 10539
- ? purple hair 11383
- ? short hair 41299
- ? underwear 11496
Meta
- ? comic 28237
- ? text 83856
Statistics
- Id: 17691
-
Posted: 2014-06-27 15:24:53
by HypnoHammer - Size: 1024x1447
- Source: palcomix.com/digimonrules/imagepages/image4.html
- Rating: Safe
- Score: 34 (vote up)
>> #21636
Score: 1 (vote Up)
Did I miss something or is there actually a missing pic?
>> #21637
Score: 0 (vote Up)
I think one picture is missing, there should be one where the girls get entranced so that the next one has a meaning.
Did I miss something or is there actually a missing pic?
Use the pool to navigate. The pages were posted out of order.
>> #24911
Score: 0 (vote Up)
>> #24912
Score: 0 (vote Up)
Since this is the first page where we see the girls, I'll ask here - why doesn't this have the "loli" tag? I don't know (or want to know) anything about Digimon, but they all look MIGHTY underage.
Loli isn't an underage tag. Loli is for females that look prepubescent, child-like. These girls look young, but developed. So they aren't lolis.
>> #24916
Score: 0 (vote Up)
Loli isn't an underage tag. Loli is for females that look prepubescent, child-like. These girls look young, but developed. So they aren't lolis.
I thought it was for girls who were 13 and under.
>> #24932
Score: 0 (vote Up)
I thought it was for girls who were 13 and under.
Nope. We thought it was silly to tag things depending on a character's age, whether it be canon or else, because half the time characters don't look their "age" at all. For example, some characters who range in the ages over 500 years old have bodies of young children, where as many, many anime characters in middle/high school have the developed breasts of a MILF and look to be in their 20s or, in some cases, 30s. <.<
It's much easier and much more useful to just tag by their body types. If they're obviously prepubescent, then they get tagged loli/shota, regardless of age.
>> #24954
Score: 0 (vote Up)
Nope. We thought it was silly to tag things depending on a character's age, whether it be canon or else, because half the time characters don't look their "age" at all. For example, some characters who range in the ages over 500 years old have bodies of young children, where as many, many anime characters in middle/high school have the developed breasts of a MILF and look to be in their 20s or, in some cases, 30s. <.<
It's much easier and much more useful to just tag by their body types. If they're obviously prepubescent, then they get tagged loli/shota, regardless of age.
seems kinda prejudice
>> #24955
Score: 0 (vote Up)
seems kinda prejudice
Firstly, that should be prejudiced, not prejudice. You're using a noun where an adjective would make more sense.
Secondly, these are drawn characters. You can draw a 2 year old, call it a 400 year old dragon maiden, and eventually someone will make porn of it. Are you telling me that wouldn't be toddler-con? Would someone who dislikes hentai of underage characters really be ok with looking at that? Really?
Obviously not. When dealing with drawn, fictional characters, the only logical approach is to say "This is obviously loli, this is obviously not". There will always be gray areas, and disagreements will pop up; but to say "we should judge based on in-universe age" is clearly absurd, as the previous example demonstrates.
>> #24956
Score: 0 (vote Up)
Firstly, that should be prejudiced, not prejudice. You're using a noun where an adjective would make more sense.
Secondly, these are drawn characters. You can draw a 2 year old, call it a 400 year old dragon maiden, and eventually someone will make porn of it. Are you telling me that wouldn't be toddler-con? Would someone who dislikes hentai of underage characters really be ok with looking at that? Really?
Obviously not. When dealing with drawn, fictional characters, the only logical approach is to say "This is obviously loli, this is obviously not". There will always be gray areas, and disagreements will pop up; but to say "we should judge based on in-universe age" is clearly absurd, as the previous example demonstrates.
*sigh* I just don't like judging by outer appearences. it creates a lot of problems. remember what happened with Africans in America?
>> #24959
Score: 0 (vote Up)