/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>7185546
Learn to draw from imagination in general and you will be able to draw anything you want, even pedo shit, you sick fuck.

>>7184352
Almost every twitter artist is a semi-closeted pedo. Not revolutionary info, just go on any of their servers.

/ic/ literally dead lol
not a big loss to be honest, it's been just a twitter refugee center for deranged pedo coomers anyway

>>7181100
>>7181096
This literal pedo garbage isn't banned...why? what the fuck?

>>7180703
I encountered him before, reminder that he is a pedo.

>>7178658
Based lolicon=\=pedo

>>7178631
>most lolicons are not attracted to real children, in fact most weebs are grossed out by 3dpd in general

That's what I'm talking about. Especially Japanese artists lmao...
It's just a fetish in the majority of cases.

>>7178636
>most people don't like lolis because they are youthful and childish
because it has been demonized to the limit

>>7178646
>If you interacted with real children
the best way to find out if you're a true pedo, or just a fake.

>esl spic pedo doesn't get it

>>7176569
Don't reply to posts that aren't direct at you. You're making the guy I want to talk to look bad by association.

>guns were also not meant to shoot stationary targets, but they do
You are aware "stationary" means standing still, right? Why would they not be? That's a pretty retarded point anyway because we DO teach kids rudimentary gun safety.

>Why are you dismissing anything i say?
You spent the whole thread calling everyone who doesn't want to hang out with kids a pedo.

>>7176512
i see you're mad as fuck, pedo-kun
cope and seethe

>>7175504
>Because pedos, groomers and pornographers
>>Cropped twitter thumbnail
>>Exact same writing style
At least try harder to hide your samefaggotry, underage tourist.

>muh tone
Also you:
>>All the replies i got is mockery and insults, but you fags get a taste of your own cum and suddenly it's totally not fair?

>insert random ass shit here to discredit and damage control
Literally your entire post in a nutshell.

>literally stfu
Cry more, seething tard.

>I've posted enough evidence
You posted a NSFW Twitter account you follow and blamed the platform for not stopping you from following it.

>>7175507
>>trivializing
Watch the vid you posted if you think I'm wrong
A thirty seconds YouTube video of a pic lf a cartoon woman is not going to turn you into a pedo you dumbass.

>>7175446
>those are simply dismissals by pornfags so that they can't be held accountable for the things they actually know are even legally wrong
I would not count that as "legally" wrong, since there is a very thin barrier to entry. It's the same reason why porn sites have you click a button that says you're 18, even though even a 4 year old can fulfill that requirement.

The issue is not that they're going out of their way to distribute content to children, the issue is that they're on sites that allow themselves as being permissive of NSFW content, but the prevalence of children causes their conditions there to change. It's like that meme of "hentai artists fleeing from another site that they helped build," it's unfair to burden the artist with the bad faith of the host for an audience that, imo at least, should not be there.

>you are quite literally damage controlling like a genuine pedo
I'm not OP, but I'm chiming in since I make (nonsexual) NSFW content on non-Twitter platforms, so your personal attacks are a bit desperate.

Furthermore, you're trying to kafkatrap someone crticizing the decision to facilitate kids on a website as... someone who wants to fuck kids? Buddy, you have the roles reversed. Realistically you're never going to stop online porn, so trying to lambast what should be the best solution for everyone makes it seem like you're okay with wanting kids to see NSFW.

Don't play this game, you'll lose. Especially with how much effort you're trying to put into this "you're secretly a pedo" shit. It comes across as a pathological liar trying to project.

>and resort to the usual insults
>>you are quite literally damage controlling like a genuine pedo when you can't admit shit's fucked up
>>You are either genuinely fucking retarded or straight up pedogroomers thinking you're outsmarting everyone
Self-awareness is not your strong suit. Do whine about "bad faith arguments" while repeating this strawman bit ad nauseam though...

>>7175438
You ain't seen nothing yet
Report system is also totally broken i.e. automated
You can also find twitch thot compilations, meme compilation full of thirstbait
Meme compilation accounts with discords getting deleted and then another 2nd and 3rd channel pops up
>>7175439
That's not the point, those are simply dismissals by pornfags so that they can't be held accountable for the things they actually know are even legally wrong i.e. distributing adult content to minors because that's how they get clout; by targeting minors with porn
>>7175440
>hehe im ooutwitting you lol lmao
oof anon, you are quite literally damage controlling like a genuine pedo when you can't admit shit's fucked up and resort to the usual insults and shooting the messenger when there is so much evidence

You complain kids find your porn, don't fucking post on sites where kids are... but wait, how else are you going to be le epic ecelebe with the big social media numbers then?
You are either genuinely fucking retarded or straight up pedogroomers thinking you're outsmarting everyone.
Honestly, the outcome is clear; you're going to make a lot of normies angry because you just can't help lying and unironically gaslighting and being unreasonable.

>hehe but if they didn't want porn they'd ban it
>hehe but kids are going to look at it anyway
>hehe but kids should not be allowed on the internet
>hehe but its the parents fault
>hehe therefore i should be allowed to spam porn everywhere while using tags of children's shows
>hehe me exposing kids to porn makes me a pedo? hehe hoho NO U want to fuck spiders!
Literally trying to defend posting porn on a site full of kids by using every single fallacy and bad faith argument under the sun, instead of going to an adult 18+ platform.
Of course, there is also nothing wrong with making porn of children's shows and posting it everywhere so that kids can easily come across it and get dem clouts and sigmagrind dose numbas fampai fr fr
But don't say this out loud or you want to fuck spiders!

>>7172519
im not denying many people here are very good. i just have a love-hate relationship with furshit
>>7172821
>obsessed
possibly
>ESL
no
>venezuelan
no. stop projecting, just accept you will never be white
>FNF
i dont play rhythm games
>pedo
no
>jartycuck
i may post a few 'jaks now and again
>larping as a real woman
its a shame this is the second time i have had to explain this: i am a guy
>>7172719
cute and trad-pilled (as in traditional art medium)

>>7172305
obsessed ESL venezuelan FNF pedo jartycuck larping as a real woman

>>7169955
>and the butterfly is such a great detail
yes the pedo mk ultra monarch butterfly is a great detail indeed. Im sure whole reddit is gasping at how heckin quirky wholesome that painting is.

>>7170004
Those were randomly fetched with a quick search. Many are missing;I've been there for maybe 5 or 6 years, I saw that thread quite often.

It's not just the that also anon. For example the Sorolla thread, say you report it and for once the janitor did their job. One or two days later you'd see a new Sorolla thread, same pic, and within the first few posts someone baiting the pedo thing again.

Same with the "where the dog at" thread, same with Pollock, etc.

If my memory's correct, there are unarchived /ic/ periods.

>>7169266
>It's atrocious.
Right? It's like the rambling of a mad man repeating the same things over and over.

We're sure we have some real schizos, there are specific threads like the Sorolla thread (with one nigger always pushing the pedo thing) or the Pollock or modern art thread (with one nigger feeling smart because he's read a little about composition). Here's a few of the latter I've saved:

>>/ic/thread/6839828
>>/ic/thread/6822488
>>/ic/thread/6802756
>>/ic/thread/6765586
>>/ic/thread/6758480
>>/ic/thread/6706530
>>/ic/thread/6675544
>>/ic/thread/6278182
>>/ic/thread/6127313
>>/ic/thread/5034304
>>/ic/thread/4534041
>>/ic/thread/4490702
>>/ic/thread/4427424
>>/ic/thread/4191314


>>7169267
See, I can't count how many times I've read that joke. I'm not a big fan of Proko's course, but if you actually put it a fair amount of work, they're good enough for you to gain.

>>7168753
pedo shit but no sex, since there is no sex they think that they have like a free pass or something to ask about them, they just dont care. For example one ask about edit some image with the focus on the feets, yeah also a feet faggot, and gives images to make them look like real life teens, it was a internet image i remember but the spirit is there.
Also for some reason the feet faggots are like in two zones: in one they like the feet detailed but smooth and clean like a sculpt, perfectly aligned with the traditional ideal of beauty, and in the other is not about the beauty of the shape but all about the fat, the wrinkles, so they like the most fat feets they can get with the most wrinkles the more the better the more deformed by skin the better, absolutely disgusting.

More than that... the usual weirdo fetishes, you know, like inflation, or gigantic breasts, ugly to do because they are not about any kind of appealing but about the concept, so you can have literally a ball with hands and feets and they like that. I always refuse to do those, there's no point, you gain zero from that, first you work with bad mood, second the image is not worth for you at all unless you are already into the fetishes, third the image dont serve any purpose you can't use it for gain followers because no one will reach for that and even more if is not your topic in first place, so should be private commissions, and since are private and not your liking you could rise the prices a lot and probably they will leave anyway after that, because they appear in first place because of the prices. So yeah.

Ah i remember to some guys asking for drawing but for real girls, they have like folders and want those, i encounter 3 scenarios of that:
-the person has 1 girl in the folder, they said is related to them, put it girlfriend, wife, friend.
-they have several girls obviously a stalker.
-the person claims to be him(her)self.
in all of course there is no way to know if that's true.

>>7168674
At least his art doesn't put him on a list.

Either way, I'm curious about how this goes. You all better post work and learn from this talented pedo or you'll prove us assholes right.

>>7167973
>Training an apprentice to help you create even more Loli pedo artwork.

Can't tell if I should be impressed or appalled. Good luck anon.

>>7163925
>sick pedo did draw something even more disgusting
oh yeah who could've thought

if I tried to put my sexual orientation to be assumed by this board, Im certain that Im going to get called a faggot and/or a pedo and nothing else.