>>3574652i firmly believe in a distinct separation between lewd and cute and their direct definitions go against each other. as i stated, there is a time and a place for it and when its forced into an image it can just ruin it - or there are plenty of images that would benefit much more from not being lewd at all. there is a difference between art which took time and can be admired and smut where the artist's main intention was to create something lewd for the sake of it - again, tasteful nudity and certain specific situations do not fall under "smut".
also i never said that all things that fall under sex appeal are tasteless, only when it is forced in for the sake of it does it become tasteless. i feel that thats mainly an opinion as i certainly feel that cute and sexy portray different feelings and while there are situations where they can overlap, they carry much different feelings and emotions. to say that cute and sexy are somewhat interchangeable just kind of defeats the purpose of having two separate words - kind of like saying that there is no point to the seperation of /e/ and /c/ where in reality that divide needs to exist due to one board being lewd/sexual and the other being cute/"pure" (if they did merge then /c/ would die as there are plenty of anons who do not enjoy or want nsfw art)
which is why i love this board. its the only weeb board where you can find people who do not blindly lewd or sexualize girls for personal pleasure but instead gain pleasure through admiring their cute non-lewd artwork and actually discussing the girl herself - you can find people who actually want to discuss why they love a character without some cancerous anon showing up and tearing apart all discussion with shitposting , oversexualization, and talking about how they'd just rape or abuse her. its all just so tiring . its also a nice board where discussions like this can happen without either side getting autisticly angry or aggressive.
apologies for the wall of text
