Don't worry, it'll only hurt for a minute?

For her, yes. For you (your soul) a little longer... But it'll be a fun ride up until then at least. Myself, I'm monitoring the 'ride' difference between here and Inkbunny as this is the first pic I've posted that's getting more attention there then here. I have 71 watchers there and 400+ here but more views on the adult version of this pic. At first i tried just using the pixilation censor but figured some one could still complain so I just wiped off the naughty bits. It makes me wonder though, there's not been an explanation of what is allowed on here when censored and what type of censoring is required? Could we get away with Anthrocon level censoring (putting a smiley face over naughty bits) or Japanese level (putting a black bar across the tip of a penis/nipple/clit) or just light pixilation? Either way you'd still know what was happening, you just couldn't clearly see it, so you wouldn't be posting cub porn because it'd be obscured. Not that I plan to post a lot of cub porn mind you, its just annoying that I can't when you consider how many cartoon characters are now 'taboo' to draw in sexual ways simply because they look young. If there was a clear definition of acceptable censoring you'd see a lot more Dot/Chipettes/ect. porn from me but I feel bad posting edited porn, even nude stuff like this.

I understand the reasoning behind the changes of the TOA, but I think that 'ageless' characters are getting the shaft (no pun intended). There are arguments for both sides, but I think that FA was being safer by just making broad sweeps rather than giving exceptions. Mind you, IB is now getting allot more attention because of it.

And I'm watching you on IB anyway

Don't get me wrong, I totally understand the change in rules but I question the definition of those changes.
"FA does not permit content containing minors involved in sexual situations. This applies to humans (Loli, Shota) or otherwise human-like characters (i.e. Cub) who are, without question, under the general legal age (18). Images or stories where the character is of questionable or indeterminable age will be up to the discretion of the administration."
To me this says NO SEXUAL PICTURES, PERIOD. but is a tasteful nude work of art sexual by nature? I grew up looking at pics of naked/topless Indians and Africans in national geographic mags as a kid in the school library and I was told those were artistic photos so they were perfectly fine for us to look at. Let me rewrite it so it makes sense:
"FA does not permit content containing minors involved in sexual situations (getting fucked/fingered/licked or appearing to have recently been any of the prior). This applies to humans (Loli, Shota) or otherwise human-like characters (i.e. Cub) who could be argued as being under the general legal age (18). Images or stories where the character is of questionable or indeterminable age will be up to the discretion of the administration. Images of such nature are allowed so long as they have been properly censored (all genitalia covered/blurred) to the level which would be allowed on TV by Broadcast Standards and Practices."
Currently is just a matter of having to take the time to draw a picture, post it to Inkbunny and then erase all the good parts before posting it here so that people here will go look at the actual picture on Inkbunny. I've been seeing a good number of artists doing that lately simply because they have a bigger following here then on Inkbunny, myself included.