It seems like anything that doesn't have "adult proportions" will be banned lmao. What does that even MEAN?

Short = child in their minds, which really shows where their minds are going

Actually that's not necessarily true, I see lots of people who are harassed because they draw fennec fox characters and kobolds, claiming they are pedo bait? I never really understood it, but it does happen.

I've seen an artist on here already get accused by a user before any of this because they drew a trans guy with a big handlebar moustache who just also happened to be short and post-top-surgery.

I guess if anyone does size-play as well might end up getting banned too x_x since short/small=child

I wish we could like comments, because YEP

I filed a ticket to ask about it, because I have a Banette character I draw porn of and I'm genuinely unsure how this is gonna be moderated, because it's... a plushie? Of course it's small and cute, that doesn't mean its a baby wdym...

I just filed a ticket because it doesn't make sense. Like. What are they doing?

I am also major confused... like... how are they going to decide what looks and doesn't look 'childlike'? That's HIGHLY subjective and really problematic for a mass amount of the userbase :/

I agree absolutely. Art styles, personal preference, this is all REALLY muddied and a terrible policy choice.

Seems they are just trying to cause more users to leave for other platforms again. I do agree that there needs to be more of a crack down on underaged characters but they need to keep in mind of size play, midgets/dwarfs, and those that for whatever reason want their characters to have nephritis[Which effects ones growth]. They are using to wide of an umbrella with this change.

That doesn't really seem fair to people who draw on-model Pokemon OR chibi art styles, someone's adult Eevee character drawn on model to the games/show is still an adult? That's also going to be a tricky rule to apply to Pokemon that aren't based on/inspired by animals, like Banette or Tinkaton or Snorunt, etc etc. A small creature with a big head and short legs =/= child/baby. I just don't think this is a good rule to try and enforce because everyone is going to have pretty different ideas of what they consider "childlike proportions" to be.

Is an Eevee a baby theme then? I never once considered Eevee to be a baby or child like but many people harass me that it does. I'm just really confused since it's very subjective.

Not trying to be argumentative but as things stand and with that interpretation, all it would take is a mod feeling uncharitable one day for your current avatar to be deemed a violation of the new policy

I agree, but I've seen moderators in other places declare that kissing with love hearts is "adult content" before. And when they're talking about how important it is to fix a loophole that apparently has not previously caused a problem in the past 13 years, I can't help but get weird anti-shipper crusader vibes off the situation.

It's a kiss between an adult and a 'child looking' if the mods are picky (which with these vague rules, you are under the umbrella) icon.
If with the way the rules rn are open ended with lots of confusion, not just eevee art is under attack, EVERY piece of art that is 'vaguely' a child like character in a situation by the mods discretion is reason to be attacked by mods, or mass reporters trying to just start a fight/punish someone they don't like.

Just because YOU feel like you are free or above others, because you dont draw Eevee or something, doesn't mean YOU are free from the vaguely written rules that this fire of a site is putting up.

I'm saying that if a mod were in a bad mood, you could be in the same trouble.
That you aren't above someone drawing ADULT Eevee, chibis, or otherwise adult characters that the mods are in a mood about that day in the eyes of vaguely laid out rules that could be subjective and open ended.

I don't have an issue with stricter CP rules, however, I do think the vagueness of these current ones stating that adult art that looks like a minor with no real good lines of where those fall, is bad rule making. There could've and SHOULD be more clear lines on this, and it shouldn't be subjective to a mod team that has already proven to be incompetent in handling things like this.

I'll just point out that not only eevee doesn't look like a baby, it also doesn't look like a fox.

So... should "chibi" or "cutesy" proportioned characters be removed? What about shortstack or dwarfism characters?

That didn't answer my questions... I'm asking about art (character designs, or art styles, or otherwise) that might be posted to FA, not real-life dogs o_oa

That's where I'm lost too. Who gets to make the rules over stylized characters and artwork? Yes I can tell the difference in irl animals, but artwork is extremely exaggerated. Why do we have to draw a specific way to fit some one else's opinion on what they think is acceptable?

Exactly? Even the more "humanlike" (I use that very loosely) Pokemon still don't have normal human proportions - Tinkaton does not look "childlike" to me, because it has a giant head with a muppet mouth and disproportionately short little featureless nub legs with chunky arms, but I've seen other people try to argue that it's basically the equivalent to a toddler.

Yeah :/ Eevee looks more like (an adult, full-grown) pomeranian or angora rabbit or long-haired cat to me than it does a fox, but overall I don't really think eevee looks like any particular real animal - it's such a cartoony design! - and I've never thought eevee looks like a baby or child. Who gets to determine if Grandpa Treecko is too childlike cos it's still a "baby" stage evolution? x__x

The internet has reached a point in this kind of discourse where I have genuinely seen people argue that adult women with small breasts and small/petite frames are "childlike", so I don't exactly put my trust in people to always deal with this in a reasonable manner. I've had one of my adult characters called "loli-coded" just because she has small breasts and narrow hips, despite being adult proportioned. *This* is the kind of thing people are frustrated about.

I disagree. My 31-year-old partner has been mistaken as a middle schooler many times by adults and children alike. :/ According to what is and isn't loli, our 87yr old grandmother would count as a loli. This is highly subjective.

Have you seen Hasbulla dude? He's 20 and looks like a toddler

That's still going to be subjective because, as I just said, people can have wildly differing opinions on what is "childlike", especially when it comes to wholly made up creatures like Pokemon. I don't think Eevee looks like a fox *at all* , let alone a baby one.

Then that's your opinion and don't look at eevee art then.

Evolution stage and level =/= age in pokemon

Then how about not joining in on the crowd that wants to police what others enjoy?

I think the issue is that it may be less character based and more user's art style based. For example, many anime styles rely on straight, long lines without out as many curves. While western super-hero comics can make a 14 year old look like she's 28 in portions. A better example is the thin line between adults drawn in a chibi style versus cub.

It also relies strongly on the artist's knowledge and ability to draw. Newer artists who are still learning anatomy may get unfairly hit by this because they are still learning to draw adult proportions versus more cartoony stuff. It's a skill.

Basically, I think they're making a bit mess for themselves to sort through. And not sure there's really a reason for it, personally.

This is false comparison. 1000 years old loli looks like a child of her species, while eevee looks like an adult of it's species. It's more like arguing that porn art of adult small monkeys should be banned because they resemble children of apes.

i feel like my shortstack art is in jeopardy lmao

I'm not so sure on that one, personally. You don't see many children with DD tits in art, haha.

i mean, i sometimes draw androgynous, chubby anime creatures where age can appear ambiguous due to the absense of breasts, so...

Yeaaaaah. Definitely wonder how that's gonna go down.

I reccomend submitting a ticket with all your 1st evo images, to both overwhelm them, and to cover your ass.

I think at this point it's the only thing I can do, and I barely have time for it. Just really sucks, this doesn't feel well thought it for execution of moderation

That's a good idea filing tickets, I'm confused as hell to tbh. I've never, ever drawn even 1 pokemon/digimon in an adult situatuon "underage/young", but the "aged-up looking" is so subjective that I honestly don't know what would count or not against this rule. Seriously what

Does no one learn from tumbler?
The new owners seem to want to sanitize the site while also not addressing real issues such as the very old feel to the systems, and missing things like blacklists that other sites have (which let's be honest here would be better than just saying "you can't post shit I don't like)

Yep. Let's make issues to avoid much bigger concerns going on in the site.

This is def concerning even with the clarifications as a lot of it seems to hinge on personal opinion of what does or doesn't look like an adult to someone- even with the "in context to other submissions" addition.

I do get the concern and where they're coming from but it just seems like a really slippery slope

I dunno, my friend. Honestly, this rule mostly works on those who are good with proportions and do realistic styles. So those who draw in a more anime style are definitely going to be hit harder because of it's very nature.

Then again, I'm probably a bit biased in that if I drew my fursona to actually look exactly like me (a 34 year old adult), I'd probably get into trouble because of being short and not overly boob-gifted. 🤷🏻‍♀️

My best guess is that this ruling is applying only to the more humanoid pokemon/digimon (either by species or by how they are drawn). But it feels like a can of worms, honestly.

According to some users, yes, Eevee when drawn "cute" would be removed. Like this person's work of Riolu and Pikachu.

https://www.furaffinity.net/journal...../#cid:59902978

Anyway, this is getting real fuckin' stupid.

So is everyone only ever supposed to draw super realistically now? Jesus fuck, y'know who else has short torsos and limbs? PEOPLE WITH DWARFISM????

"Anatomical standpoint" my ass |: fully agree with you on 'getting real fuckin' stupid.'

Hyper-realistic feral animals are the only kosher art now /j

I get mistaken for a 14yo a lot so I'm particularly peeved by this "childlike proportions" bs. Like, ffs, petite people exist.

-slowly squints in confusion-
If you get anymore information, I'm so down to know. I have multiple smaller characters that would but "small and cute so must be child!" like adult OCs. (Some being Pokemon or not humanoid) And then I have many characters that are just paired with giant monster characters. Like >#>????? Idk. I'm interested in seeing what people get back info wise /o/

Well, FA admins are physically unable to write a coherent rule, that is certain. Almost EVERY rule change is vague to the point of free interpretation, one might start to wonder if it is on purpose.

After all the reading I've done, I sincerely believe it. It's all intentionally vague for mods to mod to their own personal opinions, not adhere to strictly written terms to warn users.

It seems like this entire thing is super arbitrary and ill-defined; I see a lot of people nuking large chunks of their gallaries...

Supposedly the admins of the Discord suggested you make a trouble ticket with the "Feedback" tag if you disagree with what is going on. It might be worth doing that if you haven't already

you should be fine. the newest site update is mostly about cub porn, and they've recently done a few addendums clarifying that cute/small characters are not going to be banned, just stuff specifically made to sexualize underage characters, like cub and loli. It also has to specifically BE sexual, you're still allowed to draw kids, just not porn of them. Cuter/toonier art styles also seem to be in the clear, so I wouldn't worry that much.
A lot of people have begun self moderating in fear that the rules are now banning short characters and chibi proportions, but this doesn't mean the SITE is doing this. a lot of people are just paranoid they are going to get banned and removing their own works.
I also know there are a few users on this site who DO believe that certain species are inherently "pedo bait" but I don't believe this will have any effect on anyone. These people have been around for a while on the site, and this new update realistically isn't going to be giving them more control over the site, especially since they've since added an addendum to the new update that they are NOT banning based on species.
All in all i wouldn't worry too much, there is a lot of fearmongering and miss-information being passed around rn, but really I'd recommend not listening to people too much. If you're really worried, FA is offering up sending in a support ticket and linking some of your work to see if it violates the new rules before they go into effect on July 1st, giving you a chance to delete anything that does violate the new rules. Though looking through your gallery, I'd say you're safe.

Unfortunately, on the terms of anatomy/species and style it's not the case, and apparently they WILL remove stuff on very broad number of reasons (that they won't tell us for some reason).
This guy's post with a screencap of ticket is pretty telling https://www.furaffinity.net/journal...../#cid:59909266
Of course, some of his gallery is rightfully hit by the rule, but the specific examples are so borderline and unclear that it's very bad. Especially that pikachu picture.

yeah, looking at those screenshots sadly reminds me that this IS furaffinity we are dealing with, and so moderation is always going to be VERY case by case, mod by mod. There's probably going to be larger, more prominent artists who get hit harder for far less egregious works, and smaller, less noticeable artists who just fly under the radar, breaking rules. While the addendums to the update already made have been helpful, I feel like more clear, explicit explanations of what they are looking for would help, but we aren't very likely to get that.
Still, I feel like a lot of people are panicing a bit too hard, and all the misinformation I've seen being spread about "ALL SHORT PEOPLE ARE BEING BANNED! IF YOU'VE EVER DRAWN POKEMON THEY'RE GOING TO TERMINATE YOUR ACCOUNT BY THE END OF THE MONTH. DELETE ALL FANART RIGHT NOW OR YOUR GONE. THEY HAVE A LIST OF SPECIES THAT YOU'RE NEVER ALLOWED TO POST AGAIN" isn't very helpful to anyone, and seems to just be making things worse.
Again, I feel like anyone with worries should fill out support tickets, and see what they get back.

For my personal Pokemon characters I don't think so.

Nsfw teddiursa warning:
https://www.furaffinity.net/view/45564278/

Just very frustrated they are making dog piling and online harassment this much easier. They need to make the terms very specific for the mods to follow, not leave it up to personal interpretation.

I think a proportions guide would really help, something visual so people can tell what is and isn't ok very clearly

Since Dragneer deleted his own Eevee it's probably done for.

Sad and true.

Considering there's a ton of cub on the site even though it's been banned for 10 years? The mod staff clearly can't handle anything if they fucked up the announcement of this policy update this bad.
The only thing I see actually changing is that a bunch of people are leaving FA to go somewhere else

Bizarre that they just decided to shit the bed instead of fix the damn website so this kind of thing didn't happen. Of course, because the site is held together with chewing gum and duct tape, it's probably more likely that they can't. All the website needed was a filter. How long has it been since we were promised one? A decade?