>>54895252That doesn't really count considering you could push ANY kind of porn onto a kid and fuck them up with it. That consenting adults are the ones consuming the media is (obviously, I thought) pre-supposed in my statement (though doubtless plenty of kids look at Pokemon lewds on their own time, but that's on the parents). Moreover, it's extremely unlikely the groomers you're referring to would've been normal, productive members of society if they hadn't had Pokemon in their lives. In all likelihood they would've just been doing evil in a different fandom instead or, shit, even just used the classic candy van technique. What's never been demonstrated (because it doesn't happen) in every previous similar moral panic is that some piece of media induces the desire to partake in an abhorrent behaviors, as opposed to people who ALREADY want to engage in abhorrent behavior naturally being drawn to that kind of media, which is always going to happen with anything (arsonists getting drawn to fire services, for instance) and thus isn't a good reason to get rid of it.
>>54895317>>54895388Honestly, whatever, man. I tend to think of them as more canine-like and thus prefer canine genital features on them myself, but like I said, I really do not care. Heck, put a corkscrew dick on one specifically to fuck with
>>54895266 if you like. Do whatever you want. I think we can all agree it's a sexy Pokemon, at the very least. The great thing about Lute in particular is how she retains a more feral bodytype while having very human mannerisms (and even modes of dress) since these give her a lot of personality.
