FA+
Shop
FA's new ruling regarding Digimon/Pokemon
2 years ago
I think most of you have seen the new ruling.
Basically, FA is going to ban Pokemon/Digmon/mythical creatures in NSFW situations if they have "child-like proportions" even though they're adults. Firstly, this is a very vague and subjective definition. Your character got a short torso and looks toony and chibi? Nope, not acceptable! The funny thing is, that people have reported their own submissions to see what the moderator will say. Some have said "okay that looks fine" while another said "no they look too child-like, it will be removed".
The entire furry fandom is fundamentally based around cutsey critters, you are going to have styles that look toony... just because a character is short in stature, or has a short torso, or big eyes, whatever... does not mean they're a child nor are intended to look like one. And then there's the question of what constitutes a sexual, NSFW situation... does tickling a Pikachu on a couch playfully fall under that umbrella for removal? What about my friend's Pikachu, who's tickling my Mewmander in a faire-type situation in wooden stocks? The artist who did that has a particular chibi style, is that "too child-like" and should be removed? I mean think about, some of the pics you see, regardless of good intention or if they're wholesome, might be lumped in the same category as cub porn.
So much vagueness that not even their team can make heads and tails of it, you've got conflicting information with one of the FA team saying they don't have a list, another saying "well Cubone and Riolu look too much like children". Which one is it?? The artists with that artstyle are forced to change it, even though the characters in the situation are adults. Personally, for the most part, tickling is platonic for me. It makes people laugh, it's a good bonding exercise with friends and family alike. It doesn't always have to be sexual in nature. Yes, people can apply it to NSFW situations but you won't see it here. So I am wondering whether these new changes will affect my gallery and what I post in it, because there's a few images that have the distinct chibi artstyle.
Will the ruling say you can't tickle Pokemon at all, regardless of situation or circumstance? Context is really important, though it is also a very subjective thing so depending on who reviews it, it might be okay or it might something that breaks the rules. I am hoping they amend it to make more sense, or remove it entirely. The biggest irony of all is that TICKLE is actually a Pokemon move... if I commission that for example, will that be removed because the Pokemon in question getting it was a Riolu? Questions like that need a lot more clarity moving on, because I do hope we get that.
Basically, FA is going to ban Pokemon/Digmon/mythical creatures in NSFW situations if they have "child-like proportions" even though they're adults. Firstly, this is a very vague and subjective definition. Your character got a short torso and looks toony and chibi? Nope, not acceptable! The funny thing is, that people have reported their own submissions to see what the moderator will say. Some have said "okay that looks fine" while another said "no they look too child-like, it will be removed".
The entire furry fandom is fundamentally based around cutsey critters, you are going to have styles that look toony... just because a character is short in stature, or has a short torso, or big eyes, whatever... does not mean they're a child nor are intended to look like one. And then there's the question of what constitutes a sexual, NSFW situation... does tickling a Pikachu on a couch playfully fall under that umbrella for removal? What about my friend's Pikachu, who's tickling my Mewmander in a faire-type situation in wooden stocks? The artist who did that has a particular chibi style, is that "too child-like" and should be removed? I mean think about, some of the pics you see, regardless of good intention or if they're wholesome, might be lumped in the same category as cub porn.
So much vagueness that not even their team can make heads and tails of it, you've got conflicting information with one of the FA team saying they don't have a list, another saying "well Cubone and Riolu look too much like children". Which one is it?? The artists with that artstyle are forced to change it, even though the characters in the situation are adults. Personally, for the most part, tickling is platonic for me. It makes people laugh, it's a good bonding exercise with friends and family alike. It doesn't always have to be sexual in nature. Yes, people can apply it to NSFW situations but you won't see it here. So I am wondering whether these new changes will affect my gallery and what I post in it, because there's a few images that have the distinct chibi artstyle.
Will the ruling say you can't tickle Pokemon at all, regardless of situation or circumstance? Context is really important, though it is also a very subjective thing so depending on who reviews it, it might be okay or it might something that breaks the rules. I am hoping they amend it to make more sense, or remove it entirely. The biggest irony of all is that TICKLE is actually a Pokemon move... if I commission that for example, will that be removed because the Pokemon in question getting it was a Riolu? Questions like that need a lot more clarity moving on, because I do hope we get that.
Although some submissions on the web are deliberately cub porn when they take advantage of the "18 or older" loophole with characters, the new FA policy is really a blanket covering up any that will be deemed as cub porn based on appearances even when that wasn't the artist or writer's intention. It's reminding me of YouTube's policy with videos showing characters from children's shows in adult-themed content. Even when they use the legal warnings, they still get berated from YouTube.
I doubt FurAffinity will change or amend the policy unless they see a significant drop of members, especially those who pay them money. I already read some journals from artists who already announced they'll stop posting content on here, are leaving FA, or telling their watchers to follow them on another website. Bottom line, I wouldn't be surprised if any got in trouble now just for drawing a Riolu (Oh look, someone drew a Riolu but oh no, the Riolu is barefoot and is clearly NSFW because some thought that was "gross" and "inappropriate", even though a Riolu is barefoot in Pokemon media).