This has been coming up way too often lately to the point where I feel like I have to say something.

I do not condone the sexualization of minors in any way, shape, or form. I block and report anyone that does.

I literally get sick at even “suggestive” art of minors.
This is not a safe space for those that like that art and those that like it and I will make it as inhospitable as possible to those that do.

What is a minor?

Anyone that looks under 18 to me. I know that’s subjective, but I don’t care. I don’t care what their “official” age is; if they look like a child, then they are a child. If the artist wanted them to be considered an adult, they would have drawn an adult.

“But [Character] isn’t a child. They’re just short.”

No. They are. Being short does not mean they have to look like a child. There are several short characters I like that don’t look like children. Phein (Live-A-Hero), Varric Tethras (Dragon Age), Garmr (Housamo), Kazard (Anothereidos) to name a few.

“[Character] is an adult! They just look young.”

While talking about real living people, I understand your point. I was getting unsolicited advice from strangers about what to do after I graduated high school until I was 24. Some people just look young.
But this is not real life. This is drawn art. Someone had to make the decision to draw them looking young. You don’t set out to draw a 30-year-old and accidentally publish a 12-year-old.
To be clear, if you like the “1000-year-old chibi vampire” type I am calling you a pedophile. “The mind is of an adult, but the body is of a child” is trying to justify the pedophilia. You can’t.

“It’s just the artist’s style.”

That’s worrisome. Why did they develop a style that makes everyone look like children?

“It’s just chibi.”

The point of chibi style is to make the character small and cute. Unfortunately, the general public defines “small and cute” to mean “childlike”. This does mean to me that chibi art is supposed to look like a child and therefore should not be sexualized.

“But [Character] isn’t a child. They’re a shota.”

Shota (in porn) = pedophilia
There's no difference in designing a character to look like a child and making the character a child. It's made to cater to pedophiles.

“You’re an American. You have no right to chastise people from other cultures about this.”

O.K.
In the U.S. it was legal for a husband to rape his wife until 1970 (It became illegal in the whole country in 1993). It was seen as the wife’s job to pleasure her husband and it escalating to rape was considered a failure on the woman’s part. Your argument would mean that husbands that raped their wife until then did nothing wrong.
Cultural differences do not validate these things. At best, you can argue that they didn’t know they were wrong because of these differences.

“Just because someone like porn of underage characters it doesn’t mean they are a pedophile!”

Yes, yes it does.

“It’s a losing battle. Why don’t you just filter it and go on with your day?”

Good God I’ve tried. But due to a lot of what was mentioned above I still see it. A lot. It doesn’t get marked as such because either the poster doesn’t believe it’s a child or they are trying to get it past any systems that ban it by saying it’s not. Either way my filters can’t catch words that doesn’t exist.

To those that have any issue with what I said:
Bye. You will not be missed.