1. Mediaite
  2. Gossip Cop
  3. Geekosystem
  4. Styleite
  5. SportsGrid
  6. The Mary Sue
  7. The Maude
  8. The Braiser

What's with the name?

Allow us to explain.

Elsewhere on the internet

TV Tropes Restores Rape Tropes

Well, well. With all the recent hits fictional females have taken, it’s nice to have some good news to report.

Yesterday, The Mary Sue told you how TV Tropes had summarily deleted all tropes using the word “rape” in order to appease Google’s AdSense content policies, leaving patchy holes of contentious content all over its archives while purging things like “Rape, Burn, Pillage.” For obvious reasons, the article drew lots of attention, and further commentary from Think Progress‘s Alyssa Rosenberg, who added: “Talking about rape may involve talking about sex, but it’s not primarily about sex. A depiction and discussion of a naked woman having consensual sex, and a depiction and discussion of a woman being raped are fundamentally different things, and it’s disturbing that we’d allow [Google ad] algorithms that can’t tell the difference to elide sex and rape.”

Word of the deletions spread, and late yesterday evening, TV Tropes’ owner and head admin Fast Eddie commented to our post to inform us that tropes had been restored “due to the concern shown here and elsewhere.” Way to go, internets!

But this might not be the whole story, and TV Tropes’ deletions and “content cleanups” might have more ramifications than just Google revenue. Warning: discussion of potentially triggering content including fetish and pedophilia ahead.

While trying to put the pieces together for what prompted the deletion of TVT’s entire collection of tropes with the word “rape” in the title, we ran across an interesting sub-discussion about Fanservice tropes on a cleanup page called “Embarrassing Crap on the Wiki.” It’s been more or less an open secret on the internet for some time that despite TV Tropes’ value to all of us as an endless resource of cultural tropes, the site has attracted a sub-component of fetishists who lower the quality of the site with examples listed purely for the sake of prurience. One such example of this is the recently “cleaned” page Panty Shot, which no longer lists examples of the term due to fetishization. An example of a similar catalogue that appears to be fetish-free but has escaped whole trope deletion is Panty Fighter. It’s clear that these kinds of lists, even without context or additional discussion, are invaluable in any discussion of sexism in pop culture and fictional narratives. But there’s also the valid question of when description of tropes becomes the fetishist equivalent of Fanservice—a category which Fast Eddie suggested might need be a good place to start with site cleanup.

Fetishism in the TVT vaults alone might merely deteriorate the site and make many users uncomfortable, but inevitably there is, sadly, a pedophilic subcommunity that has existed among the tropers for some time. It can’t be easy for any open wiki-based community to deal well with this kind of content, but it looks as though they’re not handling it well. This is a Something Awful thread (ironically asking, “Why do they have such a fixation on rape?”) that includes a frank discussion of which tropers are known pedophiles. While according to our next link, those tropers were subsequently banned, Fast Eddie allegedly offered to let the banned pedophiles return to the site under different usernames. Warning: the following link leads to a discussion of TV Tropes by self-professed pedophiles. [Link to thread].

What’s far and away most alarming are the multiple but unsubstantiated claims we’ve heard, via anonymous tips, SA forums, and elsewhere, that victims of pedophilic attacks on TV Tropes were banned for complaining about the attacks, while as we’ve seen the pedophiles may have been allowed to return. It seems mind-boggling that the site would have this kind of ban policy while still allowing “discussion” that includes things like a real-life furry describing a recent public wank session in graphic, explicit detail. [Link to previous; NWS.] But TVT is well-known for having a “no discussion on the main page” policy, as well as a “no negativity/no bashing” policy. What this seems to lead to is zero tolerance—if users respond with, “hey, that’s racist” when someone says something racist, then both the racist user and the offended user are banned, among other things: we saw examples of justifiable bannings of Hitler sockpuppets and the like, but also users claiming to have been banned for “questioning their US bias”, along with other minor details. So the attitude, as far as we can tell, seems to be that as long as long as you’re polite and keep your activities off the main, list-only pages, you can stay. If you’re rude—possibly even when pedophiles are hitting on you—you have to go.

In terms of content, the “no negativity” policy seems to have led to arbitrary decisions like purging of “subjective tropes” and the relegation of valuable trope discussion to the Analysis pages. As one troper recently complained, “The Analysis pages are, by and large, worthless anyway. It seems like it would make more sense to describe why/how a trope’s used while we’re talking about that trope, ie where the tropes are listed.” Along with this, at least in terms of our original discussion of TVT’s rape tropes, it makes sense to ask if the answer to TVT’s problems is to call for more discussion, from more people, in more places around the site. If the site is overrun with dangerous and predatory users because they feel safe there, while still serving as an invaluable resource to the rest of us, then there’s arguably a way to divorce TVT’s content from its users. I’ve thrown a trope or two up on the boards once or twice myself, and there already seem to be plenty of users willing to assist with the cleanup of the rape trope pages, which has already begun again. The primary questions at this point seem to be: at what point does erasure of problematic, fetishist content become erasure of valuable context for real sociocultural discussions about problematic tropes? And, far and away more important, what can all of its moderators, users, and community supporters do to make its pages and forums safe?

The admins seem to be working very hard to clean up the site and preserve their image; but if allegations of admins harboring pedophilic activity are true, then even more than becoming “a bottle of Nightmare Fuel all its own,” TV tropes has, as an anonymous tipper to The Mary Sue noted, “essentially self-selected to become the kind of community that is probably going to be shut down by the FBI.”

ETA—Tropers respond: Many tropers are coming forward to challenge the unsubstantiated claims we’ve reported: for example, a troper responds to the allegation of banning someone for being anti-US bias with, “If by questioning US Bias you mean inserting rants about the glory of North Korea into articles at seemingly random places.” An admin claims that one user allegedly banned for “being rude to pedophiles” was banned for a different offense. But another troper commented that many users felt that administrative alarm over Google AdSense revenue was “used as a pretense for purging subjects the admins personally didn’t like, and to tighten executive control over the wiki’s content,” while another felt that restoration of the rape tropes has “reversed a lot of good work” in terms of purging the site of unwanted content. Clearly this is a complicated issue that has implications for open source community management as well as free debate.

Additionally, Fast Eddie has contacted The Mary Sue with his response:

The moderation staff at the wiki (and I) all agree that shining a light on how rape is used in storytelling is critically important. We had emailed the support people at AdSense looking for some guidance on how we could host articles on the topic without having the very survival of the wiki threatened. Yesterday, due to the concerns raised by your article, we gave up waiting on them and restored the articles without Google advertising. Just to confuse things further, they have ignored the fact that there  was no Google advertising on a given page in the past. That means we are still at risk.

The last bits of confusion around this whole thing were remarks I made in our forums related to the issue which could easily be taken as dismissive of the situation. My fault. Around the forums I assume that people know where I am generally coming from, so I can indulge in ironic statements. Turns out not be the case.  Just to state it plainly: Women’s issues are front and center in the wiki’s content policies. We do not tolerate any form of hate speech, and consider it a core goal to make people aware of how the conventions of storytelling are actually received by the audience.

I categorically deny any of the allegations that TV Tropes is the least bit friendly to anyone having pedophilia. Couldn’t be any farther from the truth.

We’re glad the tropes are back, and fervently hope that Google can be prevailed upon to let them stay that way.

Top image of Laura Croft taken from Action Girl.

Aja Romano blogs regularly at Bookshop.


  • Anonymous

    It’s a querulous situation.  It’s valid to discuss the existence of all these tropes, as they clearly exist.  But the problem is, when discussing the more…fringey of them, one runs the risk of attracting the people who really REALLY like them, far more so than the creators intended them to be liked, if you know what I mean (and I think you do)

    And very quickly a dispassionate discussion about a more mature topic attracts a bevy of giggling lurkers, and it becomes harder to keep the discussion going.

    It’s difficult to discuss, say, outlandish breast size in superhero comics without providing at least a couple graphic examples (and all that that implies), and eventually you’ll find someone who sees the pictures, ignores the words, and claims the site is just there to show spandex-clad boobs. 

  • Chihuahua Zero

    As a Troper, I would say you have some points. I’m not sure of what’s happening behind-the-scenes (since I keep myself out of most of the politics of the site), but…

    There’s some aspects that I’ll have to refute on. We might have a fetishism sub-culture, but for the last year, TV Tropes has been cracking down on it more and more and more. Fetish Fuel has been exported off-site, along with a lot of Troper Tales.

    I’m not sure of the nature of “questioning their US biases”, but this tip doesn’t have enough evidence behind it.

    Also, the “no discussion on the main page” rule exists for a reason. It’s to prevent “natter”, or cases of where an user comments on something wrong on the page instead of retying and correcting the flaw.

    But overall, it seems like you’re relying a lot on outside sources and not investigating into the TV Tropes forums itself, where you might find some of the answers.

    By the way, as a side note, we the users don’t know the exact activities of TV Tropes’ other admin, Janitor. It’s mostly Fast Eddie running it right now, or at least he’s the face of it. And that can get very stressful, especially when people are spitting venom.

    By the way, the term is “subjective tropes”. You’re one of the only people to use the phrase “subjectivity tropes” anywhere.

  • Paul C Elmore

    TVT is a great resource.  That it could justifiably be shut down due to irresponsible management is just sad on multiple levels.

  • Dingo

    Ok, quick question out of curiosity, but how is fetishism a trigger?

  • Elisabeth

    Some of your links are too clearly biased and far removed from the original source for me to trust them. Others seem to be intentionally presented in the most shocking terms possible. (E.g., I only read the first page but the “” thread seemed to be one person saying he was a pedophile and everybody else saying “ew.”)

    But taken together, it’s enough of a pattern to persuade me that TV Tropes has A Perv Problem, especially in the forums. I don’t have a solution, but stronger, saner moderation of them to prevent things like discussion of how much one wants to screw a stuffed animal might be a start.

     Or we could just assume the TV Tropes forums are, like SomethingAwful, not for the fainthearted.

  • Elisabeth

    I had the general impression Janitor had taken off long ago, for what it’s worth.  Also,  your point of view is much appreciated.

  • Chihuahua Zero


    By the way, here’s a mod’s word on one of the sources cited in the article:

  • Nick Gaston

    Some of TV Tropes’ drama involving trying to block “perverted” content actually started earlier this year when, due to a complaint from Google AdSense, a number of trope pages were censored in the same way the rape tropes were—however, in a manner that seemed to many to be somewhat overbroad and indiscriminate, including works with legitimate artistic value (such as the listing for Nabokov’s novel Lolita); works and tropes that were ribald or just gross, but weren’t actually pedophilic or illegal; and entries that would “be too hard” to keep clean.This also lead to some speculation among some of us tropers that the AdSense complaint was used as a pretense for purging subjects the admins personally didn’t like, and to tighten executive control over the wiki’s content.

  • Amanda Jean Carroll

    Pedophilia is a disease for which there is little treatment, and I think that, for what it’s worth, the internet can be one of the only places pedophiles can discuss this affliction in an open, honest way. I do not in any way, shape, or form condone the molestation of children (obviously). I do, however, believe that we, as individuals, have the right to think, feel, and say anything, no matter how abhorrent, unnatural, disgusting or offensive it may be. That’s the tough thing about free speech, but also the thing which makes it beautiful — the idea that we all have the right to exist. Not all pedophiles act on their illness, and while those who do certainly deserve great punishment, it bears mentioning that neither group has much access to mental healthcare or standardized, tested treatment. The notion that the act of thinking about a thing is not the same as the act of doing it is fundamental to the law, and we, no matter how righteous we may feel, need to try to remember that. 
    All that said, in an internet community, it seems like processes should be in place to eliminate or hide those posts which the majority of users find distasteful, or, on an informational site, which are off-topic. And it also seems clear that any predatory action on the part of anyone should result in expulsion if that is what the community chooses — the internet isn’t the government, it’s a closed community with the right to set its own rules. If you don’t like the rules, you don’t join. 

  • Rodney Anonymous

    This article is outrageously poorly-researched, and is informed by cherry-picked examples and the anonymous word of the subject of a ban (yeah, *that* will be reliable…). Very irresponsible.

  • Jessica

    Bleh. I love you guys at The Mary Sue, but you’re on the wrong side of this one. Having rape tropes managed by sensible people like the folks at Geekfeminism was an absolute best case scenario. The TV Tropes forums are full of people convinced that anime featuring sexualized children and rape are totally awesome and anyone who argues otherwise is just society trying to tell you what to do, man. In at least one case, a 15 year old girl was hounded for her “pedophile hating” attitude and propositioned until she no longer visited the site.

    Folks — folks with good hearts in good places — have been trying for months to get TV Tropes and Fast Eddie to clean up their site and I am kind of bummed that just when there seemed to be a breakthrough, The Mary Sue came in and reversed a lot of good work. I know you meant well, but .. bleh.

  • Taste_is_Sweet

    Maybe the site should just not have any discussion forums on the tropes pages, just as Wikipedia doesn’t have discussions directly on it’s entry pages. It’d be easy enough to set up un-moderated forums for discussions, I think, and then the site could use that time-honoured excuse that they’re not responsible for the forum content.

  • Riviera

    I read a few pages of the thread, and the guy goes on to say stuff like “if I got put in an anime, where lolis are constantly screwing, that’d be awesome”, at one point slipping and referring to real little girls as lolis, and saying stuff like “pedophilia is a character trait” and that he thinks of life in video game terms and stuff.

    This guy seriously needs therapy, but he’s also said that he refuses any form of treatment and believes pedophilia to not be a mental disorder.

    So, yeah, they do have a valid point about that situation. He’s got serious issues, and I’m now fairly terrified for the kids in his area.

  • Nikki Lincoln

    Ok, I don’t know if this is just me, but it seems that the Mary Sue has gradually been shifting from a “Geek Girl Blog” to a “Girl Blog that Occasionally Posts Geeky Things.” As a woman, I feel like feminist ideas and a place to talk about them is important but there are also tons of sites that are very focused on that. 

    In the last week, there have been 4 posts about rape. That’s a lot of posts of a very heavy subject on a site that I started following regularly because it was so much more light hearted and helped me enjoy the kind of pop culture nerdiness that I love. It can’t possibly be that the internet is running out of geeky things to talk about – just a couple of weeks ago, the biggest video game conference in the world took place and aside from the aforementioned discussions about rape in the new Tomb Raider and one article on the female led Assassins Creed, I feel like it went largely unnoticed.

    I can see how Tomb Raider and TV Tropes still are geeky in nature and therefore any feminist issues associated with them are important, but TWO back to back articles seem excessive. Especially seeing as they’ve been poorly written, jumping to conclusions, using quotes out of context articles that were not written by the regular Mary Sue staff. I was actually really on the opposite side regarding the Tomb Raider posts because the article was so extreme in it’s views until I read a really well written article on  IGN (I believe, may have been 1up Network or another video game site) about the state of women in video games that was balanced, well written and well researched. 

    I’m really getting to the point where I feel like truly geeky girl posts account for the minority of posts on here and instead we’re getting a lot of hyper-feminist rants that are more suited for a Frisky or Jezebel type site. Can we go back to guessing Dark Knight Rises plot lines, Becky’s old school video game reviews, fun Etsy finds (of which I have purchased at least 3 mind you), and really awesome Deviant Art fan drawings and less ranting about really polarizing or intense topics? 

    I feel like if this continues that I’m not going to feel like this is the site for me. It’s really sad because I’ve been a frequent poster with many likes on here but I left one of those hyper feminist blogs for this one and now I feel like I’m being driven out again. I remember the first article The Mary Sue wrote – about starting this blog so us Geeky Girls had a place to go when we didn’t really fit in with the girly sites or the nerdy sites. Well, this blog is becoming that place that I didn’t feel like I fit into and now I’m not sure where to turn. 

  • Brian

    If you read on, the poster says he refuses to seek counseling, refers to actual human girls as ‘lolis’, refers to his pedophilia as a ‘character trait’, fantasizes about being transported to a world where ‘lolis’ are allowed to have sex, and says he should be allowed to date little girls as long as he doesn’t do anything sexual with them. Dude’s a time bomb.

  • Sasha Harlow

     It’s worth noting that is NOT affiliated with tvtropes, but is rather an independent spin-off site.

  • Chihuahua Zero

    Un-moderated forums are a bad idea. The site then is responsible for hosting it.

  • Anonymous

    As one of the moderators on the site, I’ll certainly admit that we’ve been too tolerant of some things in the past.  A combination of being rather keen on freedom of speech, understaffing, lack of reporting of problematic behavior, and a suspicion often that such people were attention-seeking kids saying things to get reactions and were best ignored.

    However, the characterization of the forums as being “full of” pedophiles and rape-fantasists has never been remotely true.  Besides, the important thing to the world isn’t the forums, that’s inside baseball, it’s the wiki side of things.  Not unimportant, but that’s not what The Mary Sue is concerned about, I’m sure.

    The problematic users have been concentrated largely in the group of anime fans, and that’s a subculture that has a long-existing problem with tolerance of the sexualization of children.  This precedes TV Tropes and can be seen in many places where anime fans gather unless the place takes specific steps to police it, which we’d failed to do.  The tolerance the fan culture has for “lolicon” (as they term it) means that fans tend not to report it when they see it.  Most of the TV Tropes admins and moderators at the time were not in the anime culture and didn’t look at those parts of the site unless pointed to problems.

    Yes, TV Tropes is not a feminist space.  Its contributors are primarily young nerds with all the biases inherent in the broader culture.  Of course that means those biases get into articles.  

    Do you really think that we should not document the use of rape in fiction, or the problematic attitudes displayed toward it a lot of the time?  

  • Anonymous

    We have decided that we will not cover works that are primarily or exclusively porn, nor will we cover material that’s grossly pedophile-pandering.  There are several reasons, including the site owner’s personal preference, that such coverage results in bad publicity, and that it threatens our funding.

    Neither of these two cases covered ”Lolita”, and that page has been restored.

  • Anonymous

    As an IJBM moderator, I do feel the need to note that we banned the guy ASAP.

  • Jessica

    First off, Morven, you’re putting words in my mouth. At no point did I say that there should be no documentation of rape in fiction — in fact, I pretty clearly said that Geekfeminism would be a great home for this kind of thing so clearly I don’t object to the idea on principle.

    (Edited because you may have been asking specifically if I think TV Tropes shouldn’t deal with rape, in which case: that is correct. As long as your community is the way it is, I do not think it is a good place to handle problematic topics. It’s like .. putting Reddit in charge of some archive of feminist theory.)

    From what you’ve said, it seems to me that you’re excusing the horrible attitudes at TV Tropes because a) it’s under the surface and b) nerds will be nerds. Neither of those is a very good excuse in my eyes, and it certainly doesn’t redeem the overall character of TV Tropes or make me think it’s any better able to handle problematic content.

  • Jessica

    Heh. For what it’s worth, Nikki, I’m one of those “hyper feminists” and I’ve stopped following The Mary Sue recently on RSS because it felt like all they ever do is fluffy pieces on Avengers-themed shoes. I suppose you can’t keep everyone happy. :)

  • Anonymous

    Explaining is not excusing, and I intended the former, as well as a little annoyance at claims that the place is uniquely awful rather then representing the general awfulness of young nerds and the society they’re drawn from.

    No, it’s not a feminist space.  Some of its users and contributors are.  I am.  I’m far from the only one.  The place has a lot of work to do, for sure.  Is it uniquely awful?  No.

    And yes, I did intend to ask about TV Tropes specifically, and did not intend to put words in your mouth.  I think you’re wrong.  The benefits of a broadly-sourced community project are strong — enough to outweigh the flaws.  Restricting such cataloguing to only feminist spaces would restrict the breadth of the media covered, in my opinion.

  • Anonymous

    “Your rights end where mine begin,” There’s just some things that shouldn’t freakin’ happen, or be spoken about. The idea that people can openly talk about exerting their will onto another human being is vile, and wrong. Damn fucking straight someone should put a stop to it. Free speech goes both ways; it doesn’t guarentee you the right to be unquestioned or heard.

  • Jessica

    I do feel it’s uniquely awful, but that’s probably obvious. It’s not a “broadly-sourced” community, in my opinion, but a pretty insular group of young (mostly male) nerds who shun and shame outsiders.

    Honestly, I hope you’re right in the long run because the site  could be a valuable resource, but I see no reason to believe it. Actions speak louder than words, and TV Tropes has just kept getting worse over the years. I hope this kind of coverage honestly does get you guys to clean house and not just shush the anti-objectification, anti-pedophilia “whiners” away like what has happened consistently so far.

  • Ben Stratton

    I’m not going to touch on the TVT stuff, since I haven’t posted there in over a year, but could you not paint IJBM as some kind of pedophile haven or whatever?  Draven was the only “self-professed pedophile” there, and like INUH said, he got banned as soon as he made it clear that he was an unrepentant pedophile.

  • Nikki Lincoln

    The top of the page does say “Guide to Geek Girl Culture” and for some Geek Girl Culture (note that I’m wearing an Iron Man mask in my photo) that includes fun cosplay and Avengers themed everything. 

  • Anonymous

    I hope we can prove you wrong, and I hope we’d both be pleased by that.

    The admin team is neither all young (ages span from 18 to mid-fifties) nor all male (six out of 18 are women), nor all American for that matter.  This gives me some hope that we are not as closed to change and improvement as you fear.  

    The charge of nerdiness, I’m afraid, is likely both true and unfixable.

  • Doone Woodtac

     That doesn’t seem likely.

  • Doone Woodtac

    It seems to me that when all of this is over, some other group of people such as GF should host such a wiki on such social topics and abandon TVT. I like TVT, but at this point their reputation is tarnished beyond repair for me. Why?

    1) There’s money involved. It will be impossible to get to the truth and it means Fast Eddie, unfortunately, remains suspect. I mean if the poor guy is well meaning, this handling of the whole affair reeks of a site that was fast spinning out of control and the admins weren’t doing enough to rise to the challenges/didn’t take the challenges serious enough.

    2) Pedophiles. A site like this would require a VIGILANT team of admins, DEDICATED to governance and moderation of the site. I’m not convinced TVT had this because of #1 above.

    3) Unfairness. Truth or not, rumors of unfair banning policies and moderation means the word of the site admins cannot be trusted at this point. See #1 for why, but in addition to that they should be beyond repute on this issue. Consistent, regular moderation of the entire wiki means users would have a greater abundance of proof of their policy in action. This is lacking at present.

    There’s a dozen other nuance reasons I want to list, but won’t for fear of this comment becoming a child post to this article :)

    I hope GF will still just take on the duty and open up a community forum to solicit assistance with upkeep, costs, and moderation. Starting anew sounds much more appealing to me and I’d be willing to put my money where my mouth is to assist. I think many visitors to this kind of site will feel the same.

  • Doone Woodtac

     Agreeing here. I can’t see how that link to his own words is *not* proof of what the article says.

  • Doone Woodtac

     I think what you describe goes more to self control. One person’s right to divulge in colorful description the rape of children doesn’t exceed the child’s right to feel safe. That pedophile must recognize they need help in combating their sickness, not rave about the joys of child molestation. I feel confident this was Amanda’s point. She was not supporting unadulterated pedophile ravings on their sexual fantasies.

  • Anonymous

    Been a troper for 3 years….how have I not seen any of this?

  • Rodney Anonymous


  • Nick Gaston

    …it hardly seems to bode well for site management that their go-to method of dealing with pedophiles (who I, for one, have never actually seen on the site) on the wiki was to also blindly cut many legitimate entries which regular users would actually look up normally. 

  • BreadGod

    If I were to create a site like TV Tropes, I would make sure it would be a place where people discuss and analyze storytelling conventions and plot devices, and not a place where creepy, sheltered virgins talk about how sexy cartoon children are. If some creep starts talking about how he wants to have sex Penny from Inspector Gadget, he’ll get a permaban.

  • Anonymous

     ”We have decided that we will not cover works that are primarily or exclusively porn”
    Huh, TVTropes must have changed a lot since I last explored it… Because i remember coming across plenty of pages for works which are basically pornographic (particularly anime, webcomics and fanfiction), and several tropes which essentially only show up in pornography. If you really want to make the place ‘family-friendly’, as seems to be the intention, you’ve got a lot of work to do. :/

  • Anonymous

    Because you didn’t want to? I’ve been reading TVTropes for years, and while I had sometimes come across stuff that seemed a little creepy, it was only in the last few weeks I realised how awful parts of it are. After all, if you’re not interested in reading about rape or paedophilia, you wouldn’t have come across the worst of it; as a result, those pages had been left to people who were a bit *too* interested in the subject matter…

  • Anonymous

    The decision was made in April or thereabouts, and fair progress has been made.

    One of the problems, in my opinion, with covering such material is that the kind of contributors one gets who are interested in that are also likely to approach other works with the same eye, leading to mischaracterization, excessive focus on fetishistic elements in works (whether deliberately placed by the creators or not) and an atmosphere unfriendly to those who don’t approach their entertainment as porn.

    Now, I’m far from hostile to kink myself, but there’s something rather nonconsensual about bringing up hyper-sexualized viewpoints of works to those who aren’t going to a site that’s about that and didn’t get the choice.  

  • Anonymous

     Indeed. I can think of one particular example of a page I came across for a children’s animated show (which was clearly meant for children, there was no doubt about that) where the Tropes page mostly consisted of people listing the sexual fantasies they saw in it. I remember thinking it would be a shame for any actual kids who were fans of the show to come across that stuff.

    Perhaps someone should set up a separate site for covering media from an explicitly pervy/fetishistic point of view, with the hope of drawing all the creepier people over there. But that’s not your responsibility, leave it to them.

    I will just say I understand the problems you’re having – I’m an active editor at Wikipedia, and we’ve had longstanding issues over there with trying to keep adult content to where people would expect to find it. (For example, trying to stop pornographic images coming up in inocuous searches.) Any website open to contributions from the public will run into similar problems, we’ve all just got to work out how to handle them as best we can. Good luck.

  • Anonymous

    I truly have never seen this side of Tropes. I have never had any interest in *those* areas or the media that I guess they mostly dealt with. From the way it sounds it was part of the Anime group. I don’t really know though, and now I am apprehensive about going back. 

  • Anonymous

    If you see such things, please report them; the administration is keen to clean them up, believe me.

    It’s really the general problem with Wikis; people self-select what to write about, and sometimes the wrong people so choose.

  • Anonymous

     Interesting point, however this is not a closed community.

    Such things do exist, perhaps they should be utilised for these kinds of… people.

  • Anonymous

     Yes, this is one of the problems that I have with the brony (fans of my little pony) community.

    There’s a certain reluctance to hide adult content, despite the fact that kids will be googling it because it’s a kids show.

    It’s not all of the community, it’s probably a small minority, but that doesn’t help the kid who stumbles across it.

  • Anonymous

    Do you have anything other than unsubstantiated claims from various forums to prove any of this? I don’t want to be rude, but talk is cheap on the internet and you seem a little to eager to condemn TVTropes. I’ve been a member there for two years; I’ve been a feminist for 20 years. They are not an intolerant site. They have ZERO tolerance for pedophiles (if they did, I would not be a member of their site.) It saddens me that one of the few sites on the web where I can get away from “make me a sammich” jokes is being witch-hunted. Your lack of research and objectivity has assured I will not be visiting your site again, even though it deals with issues I love to discuss.

  • Anonymous

    That’s a proactive way to go about things. I’d get on board if the site had an academic spin from the start so it could be a useful resource from a narratology/semiotics perspective.

  • relmneiko

    he also said he’d never touch a kid in real life because he knows how harmful it is and the reason he’s not seeking therapy is because he’s had bad experiences with them in the past and he’s also broke. also tbh seeking therapy if you’re a pedophile is very risky because your therapist might well out you to the cops even if you haven’t done anything and shit can rain down. I can understand not wanting to go. tbh I feel sorry for the guy.

  • relmneiko

    Yeah, but pages such as Fetish Fuel are explicitly DESIGNED to give people space to rave about their sexual fantasies, and there are other pages related to porn or erotic material in that category. You go on the page to start with and you know what you’re going to find if you scroll down!

  • relmneiko

    I kind of feel like a large chunk of the comments and this article are targeting fetishists unfairly. If you’re talking out-and-out pedophiles, those have been very few in number (I’ve heard talk of two or three at most, and all of them were banned) and you’re blaring that issue out of proportion.

    I’m also very upset with TVTropes arbitrarily deciding to cut adult content – the better decision, imo, would be to house a different domain that could house the adult content separately rather than deleting everything wholesale; that’s ridiculous. Where are you going to draw the line? What do they plan to do about say, a webcomic like Sexy Losers, which, while very X-rated, is far more about comedy than porn? And if bronies wanna go on about their fetishes, give them a separate page for it if you’re so afraid of the little kiddies being traumatized.

    I’d like to take a minute to remind all the internet newbs here that the vast majority of people who enjoy loli or shota are not in fact pedophiles, just like most people who enjoy rape fantasy do not want to go out and rape people. Let the fetishists have their space, ffs. YKINMK, etc. Tolerance. Etc.

  • relmneiko

    I will also add that this reminds me highly of’s old purge of Adult rated fics back in the early 00s. After the purge… everyone left, and now there’s mostly shitty fic written by 14-year-olds there. I have the feeling that things of that nature may happen to TVTropes if they are keen to continue with their agenda of censorship so they can stay on their moral high horses while protecting their legal behinds instead of allowing fans a free space in which to discuss their interests.

  • Anonymous

    All such pages have been removed.

  • Cassy

    I agree with Nikki. I like posts about current issues and events, I think The Mary Sue usually offers some interesting viewpoints. And lately it feels like women are under pretty constant attack by idiots, so it’s important to have intelligent voices counter-acting that. But you definitely need to boost up your number of geek articles! I’m a feminist, but bad shit going down in the world doesn’t mean I suddenly don’t care about cartoons and books and video games. If anything, those things become more important to me.

  • Doone Woodtac

     And therein lies the key to creating a positive, resourceful space for discussion of sensitive topics: an academic approach. Completely agree.

  • Doone Woodtac

    I repeat, it’s never ok to rave about sexually assaulting children, no matter that there are sites which condone it. That’s the kind of thing persons with this problem have to identify and seek counseling about. That needs to be discussed in a private and productive environment which will help them deal with it in ways that don’t harm others.

  • Amanda Jean Carroll

    By “closed community” I simply mean one you choose to be a part of. I imagine there’s a better way to say that than the way I went with! 

  • Amanda Jean Carroll

    I certainly don’t support the views of pedophiles, criminy! I just have to point out that the idea that “some things shouldn’t be spoken about” is the exact opposite of free speech. It’s fine for a self-chosen community to maintain rules about speech. It’s fine to report a person whom you believe to be a child molester to the police. It’s not okay for the government to say “some things shouldn’t be spoken about”. Should George R.R. Martin go to jail for the things he writes? None of us gets to pick and choose what is and isn’t said. That means the government can’t (or shouldn’t be able to) stop the horrible, sad people who are afflicted with pedophilia from talking about their preferences (though they MUST keep them from acting on them), nor can they keep me from saying that I think Christianity is a cult or that politics is mainly horseshit. Free speech certainly doesn’t guarantee you the right to be unquestioned — in fact it guarantees that you will be. But questioning is not the same as censorship, and it’s censorship I’m talking about here. 
    And if people cared more about helping pedophiles instead of hating them and being disgusted by them, we might have more systems in place to help them and prevent them from acting on their awful tendencies. Protecting kids, who truly can’t protect themselves, should be one of the main functions of government. 

  • Guest

    Lolacat here. Just saying that I was partly banned because I was mean to pedophiles and because I “caused trouble.” The trouble I caused was getting angry at a couple pedophiles who accused me of being a prude because I didn’t think we needed a creepy page on tentacle rape. I was also punished for saying that a certain user seemed disturbingly eager to defend people who fuck kids and he was. Just throwing this out there, Ccoa is the twit who said that because no one reported the people hitting on me, it must not have happened. I did not get mad until later because I didn’t realize how bad it was until months after it happened. Fuck, there was even a guy in his 20′s who stated that he would like to see naked pictures of me and he was not punished. People in the statutory rape thread were straight up telling me that I shouldn’t have a problem with adults having sex with kids like me and I was “biased” for it. Only one was punished but because he was the only person I ever reported. I didn’t report the other users because I was afraid the mods wouldn’t take it seriously.

  • Anonymous

    Academia can be negative and have its own sorts of bullshit, but it’s a sort of predictable, regimented, decorous bullshit that seems a great deal easier to parse (especially as its dryness keeps flamewars rather cordial in comparison to internet norms). This and the academic approach is a great deal easier to use in academia, whereas TVTropes is a useful resource but not exactly something you can always cite, due to cultural disconnect (I feel uncomfortable using the term “Mind Rape” in a folk studies paper, for example).

    Side note: I love the things you’ve been writing on your blog lately. I’ve only just come upon your writing in the past couple of weeks, but I am so glad I did as you provide cogent and thoughtful analysis as a cultural insider.

  • Anonymous

    Shallow? The site only gets even more pedo-horrible as you dig deeper.

  • Cargi Nannerb

    Congratulations, all you free speech fuckwits let a site full of admitted peadeophile rape fetishists get all their rape pages back for wank material.

    Romano, Rosenberg, and all of you mouth-breathers who agree with them need to get the fuck off the internet and stop enabling these assholes.

  • Cargi Nannerb

    Ban Mr AHR. The person who defended a story of a 7 year-old getting gang-raped as “Just Porn.”

  • Anonymous

    It strikes me that a teenage girl with rape fantasies is not the person to blame for rape culture, and thus banning was not the answer.  Explaining that TVT is not the place for such things, and why, works a lot better.  

  • Anonymous

    Fast Eddie was the one who banned that guy, explicitly for saying he was a pedophile.  I call bullshit.

    Two of our moderating team are survivors of childhood sexual abuse.  Others are rape survivors.  Saying that we are anything other than opposed to such things is a pretty disgusting brand of horrible, frankly.

  • Anonymous

    Lola, I wish you had reported anyone whose behavior you felt was disturbing.  

    As for pages, we have pages on creepy things because they are things that happen in media; in the case of tentacle erotica, yes, it’s creepy, but it’s a significant theme in Japanese media and even Wikipedia has a page about it.  TV Tropes should never be showing prurience in our descriptions of such things, but avoiding the creepier tropes in media is quite against what we’re doing.

  • Tara Ashford

    Yeah, I’m not so cool with connecting paedophilia with the sexual abuse of children. Paedophilia generally means “sexually attracted to children”. It’s not something that a person chooses to be, and there are many people out there with the condition who are truly horrified by the idea of abusing children. Plus, there are many many people who sexually abuse children who are not necessarily paedophiles in that they are not sexually attracted to children – for them it’s not about desire and attraction, it’s about power and control.

    It’s just not accurate or useful to conflate child abusers with paedophiles.

  • lars g.

    TVTropes is a resource used by a lot more people than sites like Geek Feminism are. Even as a geek feminist, I’m far more likely to look at TV Tropes because a lot of my favorite works fall outside of what is usually covered by “geek culture” (for example, I’m as much of a history buff as I am a sci-fi fan and so I’m as likely to look up Austen novels or a historical drama like Mad Men or Downton Abbey as I am to look up Firefly or Star Trek).

    The fact of the matter is that for feminism to truly achieve its goals, we need to be willing to make people aware of these issues who wouldn’t normally be reading feminist blogs/wikis. We can’t expect every TV Tropes reader to somehow both know that Geek Feminism Wiki exists and know to look there for the rape conversations that wouldn’t be happening on TVT in your model of it. For a lot of people, if these conversations are only happening on feminist sites they won’t be happening at all. 

    And the fact of the matter is that there are a million and one other, better ways to deal with this problem than to call for TVT to censor itself (as is usually the case; censorship is rarely the best solution). For one, much as TVT likes to distinguish itself from The Other Wiki, this is one area where they could do well to emulate them. As probably the most famous user-run encyclopedia on the Internet, Wikipedia has no shortage of creeps and trolls, but they are able to keep most of their articles free of that nonsense by having a lot of vigilant, dedicated editors keep close watch on certain pages that seem to attract trouble. Some of them are even restricted to editing by specific users (something TVT is already doing with a lot of contentious articles, and which I would suggest is a good idea for the rape- and pedophilia-related articles). That way, we can continue to make a broader audience aware of those topics without worrying they’ll be hijacked by rape apologists and pedophiles.

  • lars g.

    From what I understand from TVT’s new pedophilia policy, people are being banned for suggesting that they want to have sex with children, fictional or otherwise.

  • Invisible_Jester89

    Thank you Ben and INUH. I’m also a proud Troper and I’m feeling a bit insulted by this article, to be honest. I can tell you that said pedophile was NOT the majority of users, and we are NOT harboring pedophiles on TVT despite what the article says to the contrary. I am disappointed in The Mary Sue for spinning this article in such a way that it portrays TVT as a haven for pedophiles, because it is definitely not. We do NOT tolerate it, and that’s why the cleanup squad was organized to begin with. On the issue of banning people for “being rude to pedophiles”, we happened to have a bit of an issue in the past with trolls getting people marked as pedophiles or reporting people for “pervy behavior” when that was not the case. That is why that type of blocking happens – because sometimes it’s hard to see what is a troll comment, and what isn’t. The zero tolerance policy isn’t favoring anyone, least of all pedos. And what it actually states is that you aren’t supposed to call people out on the boards in general – you’re supposed to report them in private, and there’s a button for that purpose. It’s an attempt to minimize flamebait and keep the forums from devolving into attack threads.

    IJBM, while being a trope on TVT and a series of pages, also has its own site. And that site is a spin-off of TVT. A similar thing happened to the Troper Tales pages when too many people were posting pervy things – they got moved to another Wiki (called FetishWiki) and Troper Tales were deleted from the rest of the pages. TVT is actually very good about moderating content on the main pages, and as for the forums, I have never felt anything but safe as a woman there. As for the Rape tropes “being deleted”, that is a lie. They were never deleted to begin with – they were hidden while the imbroglio with Google was happening. That is, a block page was put up that said, “We do not want a trope on this subject.” And that was it. No content was removed, deleted, or otherwise changed. It was only blocked. This has happened before – it’s why TVT began cleaning up pervy examples to begin with and why some trope pages say “No Real Life Examples, Please!” at the bottom. We’re not trying to block discussion about rape or sexual abuse in the media. We’re just trying to play along with Google’s requirements, and no, they aren’t necessarily right, but it’s what we need to do to keep advertising going. Surely The Mary Sue, as a site, can understand the struggle to speak about content like rape while also trying to keep ad revenue going.

    I feel hurt that you would spin one of my home turf sites as a den of perversion akin to /b/ by writing an article like this. Please stop attacking TVT. We know there’s a problem, and we’re fixing it. We already have enough trouble trying to convince Google to let us keep the Rape Tropes; we don’t need The Mary-Sue spreading misinformation about us as well in the form of spin.

  • platedlizard

    TVTropes is, in their own words,  a “family-friendly” site. In other words, it’s a site that bills itself as a safe place for kids to browse without the need for parental supervision (at least, that’s how I interpret “family-friendly”). Now, would you consider discussion of rape and pedophilia to be “family-friendly” ? I do not. TVTropes had pages upon pages documenting every single appearance of a character wearing panties in cartoons for goodness sakes! Pages upon pages of drooling over under-age stars, pages upon pages discussing every single permutation of fictional rape. Now, if TVTropes had not billed itself I would have far less a problem with it, but they did not. Moveover, they cataloged works that were clearly aimed right at the pedophile market, one of the more popular pages was of an anime that featured an eight year old girl masturbating and trying to seduce her teacher. Thanks to TVTrope’s neutrality rule pages on rape and pedophilia did not even have tones that condemned those acts. Instead it became something of a database for works of that nature, enabling pedophiles to find porn for them in a supposedly “safe” site. Keep in mind, this is a supposedly “family-friendly” site.

    The right thing to do was to pull all the rape and pedophilia tropes. I agree that another site that could handle those tropes in a more mature fashion should get them, but TVTropes was not the place and I’m sad to see them back.

  • platedlizard


  • platedlizard

    Adult material should not go on a site that bills itself as “family-friendly” like TVTropes does. Full. Stop. If bronies want a wiki to babble on about their fetishes then they should make their own wiki, not store it on TVTropes.

    This sliding-slope argument is bullshit.

  • platedlizard

    lol was full of crap before the purge too, don’t kid yourself. Sturgeon’s Law at it’s finest.

  • platedlizard

    The problem with Lolita is that if you include it you immediately get a boat load of social rejects who completely missed the point of the book saying ‘b-b-but Lolita!” when you take away their favorite child-fucking animes. Lolita is a significant work worthy of discussion, unfortunately TVTropes does not have the collective maturity to deal with it.

  • Invisible_Jester89

     If it helps, Jessica, I am 20, female, feminist, and a current Troper. We ARE changing. But you have to give us time and a second chance.

  • Invisible_Jester89

    Nice name, troll. I am not sure if by “pedo-horrible” you mean “more prone to pedophilia” or “less tolerant of pedophilia”. We’ve been improving. Look at the forest and not just one bloody, problematic tree, please.

  • Invisible_Jester89

    I am so sorry that happened to you, Lola, and I as a Troper am appalled that this happened in my community. We are cracking down on this, and we are changing. But it will take time. Sometimes the forums unfortunately take the approach that real problems are just trolls, because things aren’t always what they seem on the internet…

    I wish you had reported them, again and again, all of them. The squeaky wheel is the one that gets the oil, and the more you report, the more things become the mods’ attention.

  • Invisible_Jester89

    Tara, I will try to respect your opinion, but a lot of people are going to see you as a “pedophile apologizer” based on what you just said. The point is that most people do see pedophiles as inherently dangerous, and most people do see them as child abusers because of their sexual fetish. It’s just not considered socially or morally appropriate or okay.

  • Invisible_Jester89

     I’ve never seen it either and until now, I wasn’t even aware that this WAS such a big problem in the Anime fandom on TVT. But people need to remember that it’s one set of people and one part of TVT. Not the whole site.

  • lars g.

    If you read the discussions for that rule, that was not what happened. If anything, it was the opposite; the decision to temporarily remove the page for Lolita got the move a lot of opponents who wouldn’t have cared less if they were just going after real lolicon and shotacon, and who were showing how other *classic works* (such as Brave New World) could also conceivably be banned under the new rule if it restricts anything that depicts underage sex in even a negative light. If anything, most of the defenders of Lolita were quite vigilant about wanting to get the actual anime porn removed and drawing sharp lines in the sand so that this wouldn’t happen again (because pedophiles’ influence would be reduced) and if it did, works like Lolita would not be targeted, only legitimate child porn.

    They scrubbed the Lolita page of any whining from pedophiles and made both the main page and YMMV page locked except for a small group of people who they know are not going to use it for gross shit. I don’t see why it would continue to be a problem.

  • lars g.

    Yeah, except there are a lot of people who need a resource like that to be able to discuss these sensitive topics in an adult manner. You’re ignoring how TVT has been successful in other approaches, more similar to the ones used in Wikipedia, that limit the influence of pedophiles over those discussions without eliminating the discussions entirely.

    Also, “family-friendly” is a very subjective term. How does it help the far too many families who are actually affected by this issue to just not discuss them? And where do we draw the line, considering there are plenty of other topics that other don’t consider “family-friendly” – like ADULT sexuality, or drug use, or homosexuality, or not-100%-positive depictions of their religion – that would render something like TVT completely useless if they were all eliminated?

  • lars g.

    It’s not a “bullshit” argument when you’re continually using a term that has a history of being used to censor a far wider range of topics than what you are clamoring for here.

  • lars g.

    Which is probably why they removed Fetish Fuel from the wiki…

  • lars g.

    But I do have to wonder, why was Lolita ever removed in the first place? It so clearly doesn’t fall in those categories, it’s well-regarded as a classic work of art that is obviously ANTI-pedophile; I mean, Humbert Humbert is one of the most well-known examples in literature of the Unreliable Narrator. It did seriously hurt the credibility to me of the TVT admins (in terms of their knowledge of literature as people running a wiki dedicated to literary analysis) that they would consider Lolita to potentially be “pedoshit,” and it attracted a lot of unnecessary controversy to the policy – people who would never have been angry if they really were just removing blatant porn and pro-pedophilia works.

    I understand cleaning up the page and locking it for non-approved people, but I don’t see why that necessitated a few days of nothing but “We don’t want a page on this topic.”

  • lars g.

    (actually a reply to thursdaynext)

    See, I think in that case that’s one where the parents need to step in and better monitor what their kids are looking up on the Internet. Put on parental controls (which don’t completely get rid of the fetishistic shit on Google Images, but you can report people who try to get around that), be with them when they are on the Internet. Children who are young enough to be harmed by that really should not be having unlimited access to the Internet.

    While I’m not personally a fan of “clop,” I don’t think people should be required to hide their fetishes because some kids might stumble across it, especially on sites that make it clear they are adult-fans-only or where there’s a feature that hides sexual/violent content (like FIMFiction has). Adult bronies are not responsible for parenting other people’s children.

    I mean, think about it this way – a kid could wake up in the middle of a Sunday night, stumble down to turn on the TV and have it flip on to a secretary and a copywriter having a quickie on Mad Men. Never mind that it’s a show that is clearly marketed only toward adults, shown at an hour in which stuff like that is considered OK because little kids are assumed to be asleep. A kid MIGHT stumble across it, so we can’t have that!

    I don’t see how applying a similar standard to the Internet isn’t just as ridiculous.

  • Sasha Harlow

    Lola, I’m sorry you’re angry, but you’re flat out lying.  I never said “it never happened”, I said you didn’t report it (and you didn’t), and thus we couldn’t act on it.  Moderation can’t help you if we don’t know about the problem.

    As to your ban, I can see your ban page and witnessed your breakdown that led to your ban.  You were banned for your behavior in the perversity clean-up effort: nothing else. You weren’t being “mean” to anyone, you were fear mongering, overreacting, and making it extremely difficult for us to do something vitally important – clean up prurience on the wiki.  Anything else you claim about the imagined reasons for your ban is a completely untrue and comes off as sour grapes.

  • Anonymous

    Moreover, at least two people on the P5 cleanup are survivors of rape and sexual assault, and they were two of the biggest proponents for bringing back those tropes, before it was revealed that it was not an issue of morals, but an issue of Google’s money (and Google’s morals, but that’s another story for another day). Whitewashing rape is just as bad as what you’re proposing, which is an imaginary TV Tropes where everyone is an insane masturbatory rape-monger.

  • Jasper Lawrence


    “We shoot for ‘family friendly’ at TV Tropes.

    What does that mean? A couple of things.
    First, The thing we are marking as “mature content” is our article,
    not the work the article is about. We can talk about literature (media, that is) which is racy.
    We just can’t be the racy literature.

    The second component of “family friendly” is the so-called ‘cuss’ words.

    Look, there is almost always a funnier way to say whatever you’d like
    to say than just by dumping a bunch of shock-value words out there.
    If your imagination is failing you to the extent that you need more
    than one cuss word on a page, you should just back off for a while
    and let your brain come back on line. We’d actually be a better source
    of humor with just one cuss word per hundred pages.

    The third and last component of family friendliness is pictures. It’s real easy. No naked people, thanks.
    Readers who are wondering what a naked person might look like can just check out the rest of the Internet.”

    Or in short, TV Tropes aims for PG-13, not G.

  • Riii

    It’s the same crap I read here and other sites. If anyone thinks lolicon anime is great they’re a pedo and if they are then insult him until he goes to the police for liking something that is perfectly normal. It may not be normal to you but it is those who like loli anime/real young girls. I hate scat but I’m not going to tell someone “oh you’re sick, go to to jail you freak.” I’m going to lightly voice my disgust of it, he’ll say he likes it, I’ll say whatever floats your boat and not fight to make it illegal even in private and it’s the same with pedos, they want to have sex with a little girl (as long as it’s consensual) and it’s only illegal because a majority of people don’t like it. So those people should just fuck off and let these guys do what they want as long as it’s not rape. That statement about how children can’t decide if they want to have sex is bullshit and that’s only because they haven’t been informed of it, some do know of sex and do want to have it.

  • Anonymous

    Who the heck is Laura Croft?

  • 57Academics

    I’ve been a longtime Troper. (And JSYK, I’m a woman.) There are two divisions, almost, of that site – the exploration of the tropes themselves, and then a section for “real life” stories that are tied to specific tropes – let’s say, for instance, the Perverse Sexual Lust trope, where everyone gets to admit embarrassing things like that they get hot under the collar for Rarity, or admit that you’ve been wanting to take a ride on the original Green Ranger since that show came on.

    There really aren’t many articles that are locked within the trope discussion area so that users can not add examples; to get that, it’s gotta be a pretty bad thing, like the entry for Lolicon. They explain what it is and then shut it down for further additions because “we are not here to find your perverted Lolicon videos for you. We are here to discuss tropes.”

    It’s in the second part, in Troper Tales, where things become a pit of “ewwww”. It would seem to me that increased,moderation in those areas is the way to go, with a zero-tolerance banhammer for using Troper Tales to talk about your pedophiliac desires.

    Increased moderation for the tropes that might invite that kind would probably be smart, too.

    Fast Eddie’s a good guy; he just needs to figure out a way that doesn’t have the website becoming like a disgusting subreddit.

  • Seriously Now

    Dude, seriously. Ban her. She’s perpetuating rape culture on your site. If you really want to “clean things up,” like you keep talking about, then pick a baseline (“No pedophilia or pedophile apologia”) and work your way through.

  • The Voice

    The only one punished was an innocent man, so speaks The Voice.

  • The Voice

    Boy, are you an idiot. Did you just not see the comment directly above you, or what? People like you have ruined the site.

  • Imo Maru

    I wish there’d been people like you on the forums way back then. So much ugliness could’ve been avoided.

  • Imo Maru

    Can’t fault you for that. Draven’s delusional point of view was his choice, after all, and a disgusting one at that. Having said that, I’d better not find out that you or anyone on that site has banned someone for having a disorder and nothing else. I’m the Arbiter of Justice here, if I’m after you, you’re in the wrong.

  • Imo Maru

    Really? Damn, this is a sticky situation…

  • Imo Maru

    Injustice in plain sight, and none of you lift a finger.

  • Imo Maru

    There is an answer I’d like to have.

  • Imo Maru

    Isn’t it amusing that whenever people like you say things like “Full. Stop.” or “Period” or “End of story”, you’re almost always “Dead. Wrong.”? Yeah, yeah, technicalities! If it was truly family friendly, it would have to leave out hundreds of plot points and works and well, nearly everything. Stupid.

  • Imo Maru

    Actually, she went nuts because some folks were saying she was a prude for apparently showing contempt for anything non-vanilla. I personally saw one discussion board where she spent the entire time there being openly derisive to everyone on the other side of the argument while providing no argument of her own. There was even one guy who was good enough to call her out on her crap only for her to lose her shit and lie to the mods about him, AFTER he apologised.(Not something I would of done.) I have witnessed her profanity-filled tantrums and disgusting behavior, and I can tell you for damn sure she earned her ban. Don’t let me catch you sympathising with her again.

  • BreadGod

    Why are you engaged in victim blaming?

  • BreadGod

    Don’t you engage in victim blaming. Don’t you dare.

  • Anonymous

    “I’d like to take a minute to remind all the internet newbs here that the vast majority of people who enjoy loli or shota are not in fact pedophiles, just like most people who enjoy rape fantasy do not want to go out and rape people.”

    Whoa whoa whoa. Someone just chose the wrong hill to die on here. Like I see where you could be going with this but something tells me this is not the best forum for your loli/pedophile debate.