Search
(Supports wildcard *)Copyright
- ? digimon 702
Character
- ? gatomon 40
- ? kari kamiya 187
- ? mimi tachikawa 60
- ? sora takenouchi 65
- ? yolei inoue 52
Artist
- ? bbmbbf 84
- ? palcomix 79
General
- ? breasts 103308
- ? brown hair 29341
- ? glasses 10122
- ? large breasts 58316
- ? long hair 57991
- ? multiple girls 15511
- ? orange hair 5813
- ? panties 8363
- ? pink hair 10428
- ? purple hair 10962
- ? short hair 40968
- ? underwear 11400
Meta
- ? comic 28053
- ? text 82371
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)