If not Slurpuff, I think Galarian Ponyta would be fitting. It only trusts the pure of heart and I feel like Rod would be able to earn its trust.

I think Rod Flanders would have a Slurpuff. I vaguely remember him baking with Maude and one of Slurpuff's Pokédex entries mentions using its keen senses for medical purposes, which could be useful for Rod's diabetes. Plus, it just seems really cute.

We don’t have basic, actual accessibility accommodations for people with disabilities in public life yet writers are constantly being scolded to “drop the big words to reach as many people as possible.” You can’t make art accessible by creating illiteracy; you can only create misery and compliance.

Ah, I see. That's unfortunate.

There was a more modern version released in 1999, so maybe you're referring to that. Makes me wonder the legal and moral ramifications of adapting a public domain book with questionable material in it.

Maybe I have the wrong book, but it seems like the original author of Elsie Dinsmore died in 1909. It'd be hard to do any corrective action other than outright banning the book without using a time machine.

Pedophilia is harmful and the fact you don't see that is rather concerning. 🤨

Save the competition for things that won’t kill us if we lose, right?

I say this as someone living in a state that seemingly wants to legislate queer people out of existence, including in fiction.

Daddy's Little Toy IS harmful. Whatever artistic merit it has is outweighed by the pain it inflicts onto survivors of CSA.

I prefer rehabilitation over punitive justice and I have my doubts over whether or not putting Tori Woods in prison for up to 10 years would be productive or not. Regardless, I feel like people are falling into the "slippery slope" fallacy by arguing this one book will cause mass censorship.

The law isn't always morally correct and people have used legislation for censorship/authoritarianism. However, I feel like citing this legislation is important for providing context.

For it to be considered child abuse material, it'd have to be in a context most adults would consider morally repugnant. From what I know of Daddy's Little Toy, this is the case. A man thinks of a child inappropriately and gets a "happily ever after" with her. It's grooming.

91FB 2 goes on to explain the deciding factors over whether or not material is considered offensive including moral decency, literary/artistic/educational merit, journalistic merit, and the general character of the material.