FA+
Shop
Facepalms
2 years ago
More of my opinion on the latest update... it's ass backwards. I can understand the desire to protect minors and discourage/eliminate pedophilia on this site, and in general; I'm all for that being a childhood rape victim of it in the real a long time ago. However, the implementation of protection here is still heads in the ass dumb. Rather than create blanket bans for things they deem as young or cub, they need to in my opinion:
Age restrict the website for starters- anyone who doesn't want to prove they are over 18 with a photo ID displaying their name, date of birth, and photo privately to admins should not be allowed to see NSFW, post NSFW, or advertise commissions. On top of that anyone who fails to show they are of age should have their note system disabled, they cannot send or receive notes. This leaves any predators on the site 2 options, responding to journals or leaving shouts for the minor. Then you can ban them and know who they are. Any minor or Adult who falsifies documentation they are of age and who they're supposed to be can get an IP ban and reported for fraudulent and suspcious activity.
Implement a proper blacklist like e621. If you don't like certain art content, don't look at it. Put it on a blacklist and enjoy the rest of the content a creator makes.
Require certain artists/artworks based on cannon AGE(not appearance or perceived appearance) to have a content warning and spoiler to images that involve fictional characters who are minors. This, combined with blacklist is plenty of warning and protection from content a viewer doesn't want to see. (If the viewer doesn't want to see it but looks anyway, that's their fault as the viewer then. You're not a victim if you chose to ignore the warnings)
KEEP NSFW HUMAN ARTWORK OFF THE SITE. This is a furry website, which means artwork of ANIMAL characters who are of our imaginations or cartoons. Keep the human body off the website. That means no irl NSFW photos, no NSFW or fetishes involving humans, etc. If it's horny and involves humans irl or artwork, keep it off a furry website. There's other places to post stuff like that.
What the community can do, honestly, some need to grow up as well. I won't pretend that I'm into or dislike cub. I'm not into it. I don't care for or to see cub artwork because it's just not attractive 99% of the time. I do not actively search for it. However, if an artist submits a piece of art with a proper content warning that has a younger character who is FICTIONAL and with no context or relation to an irl child that is nice artwork, I'd give it a fav and move on.
For those who actually like cub artwork, don't paint them with a broad brush and throw them into the "oh they must be a pedophile in real life because they like cub or young animals in artwork". I'm sure with the above implementations, any REAL pedophile will not make it to the site or last long. Whether you want to accept it or not, cub/young art of animal characters who don't actually exist, does not equate to pedophilia in real life, just like feral on anthro/anthro on feral does not automatically equate to irl interest in beastiality. That brush and assumption is far too encompassing to have and request rules to protect against. If you as a viewer do not want to see that kind of content because you just can't paint without a broad brush, then it's on you, after artists have met the content warnings of young furry artwork, to blacklist and not look at that content. You aren't protecting anyone's best interests complaining about something you chose to see after all other warnings. What, as a viewer, you are doing then is throwing a hateful hissy fit and making others responsible for YOUR choice.
I think that sums up the best sense and my opinion accurately. Canceling culture isn't really the right way to protect anyone imo. That's like being an overprotective parent. All the person is learning is that they can get their way by throwing a fit and living in a bubble others just have to get out of the way for. They aren't learning a damn thing about coping mechanisms, how to properly handle another with an opinion that is in opposition to their own, or how to function in a world that has vast amounts of varying opinions.
Age restrict the website for starters- anyone who doesn't want to prove they are over 18 with a photo ID displaying their name, date of birth, and photo privately to admins should not be allowed to see NSFW, post NSFW, or advertise commissions. On top of that anyone who fails to show they are of age should have their note system disabled, they cannot send or receive notes. This leaves any predators on the site 2 options, responding to journals or leaving shouts for the minor. Then you can ban them and know who they are. Any minor or Adult who falsifies documentation they are of age and who they're supposed to be can get an IP ban and reported for fraudulent and suspcious activity.
Implement a proper blacklist like e621. If you don't like certain art content, don't look at it. Put it on a blacklist and enjoy the rest of the content a creator makes.
Require certain artists/artworks based on cannon AGE(not appearance or perceived appearance) to have a content warning and spoiler to images that involve fictional characters who are minors. This, combined with blacklist is plenty of warning and protection from content a viewer doesn't want to see. (If the viewer doesn't want to see it but looks anyway, that's their fault as the viewer then. You're not a victim if you chose to ignore the warnings)
KEEP NSFW HUMAN ARTWORK OFF THE SITE. This is a furry website, which means artwork of ANIMAL characters who are of our imaginations or cartoons. Keep the human body off the website. That means no irl NSFW photos, no NSFW or fetishes involving humans, etc. If it's horny and involves humans irl or artwork, keep it off a furry website. There's other places to post stuff like that.
What the community can do, honestly, some need to grow up as well. I won't pretend that I'm into or dislike cub. I'm not into it. I don't care for or to see cub artwork because it's just not attractive 99% of the time. I do not actively search for it. However, if an artist submits a piece of art with a proper content warning that has a younger character who is FICTIONAL and with no context or relation to an irl child that is nice artwork, I'd give it a fav and move on.
For those who actually like cub artwork, don't paint them with a broad brush and throw them into the "oh they must be a pedophile in real life because they like cub or young animals in artwork". I'm sure with the above implementations, any REAL pedophile will not make it to the site or last long. Whether you want to accept it or not, cub/young art of animal characters who don't actually exist, does not equate to pedophilia in real life, just like feral on anthro/anthro on feral does not automatically equate to irl interest in beastiality. That brush and assumption is far too encompassing to have and request rules to protect against. If you as a viewer do not want to see that kind of content because you just can't paint without a broad brush, then it's on you, after artists have met the content warnings of young furry artwork, to blacklist and not look at that content. You aren't protecting anyone's best interests complaining about something you chose to see after all other warnings. What, as a viewer, you are doing then is throwing a hateful hissy fit and making others responsible for YOUR choice.
I think that sums up the best sense and my opinion accurately. Canceling culture isn't really the right way to protect anyone imo. That's like being an overprotective parent. All the person is learning is that they can get their way by throwing a fit and living in a bubble others just have to get out of the way for. They aren't learning a damn thing about coping mechanisms, how to properly handle another with an opinion that is in opposition to their own, or how to function in a world that has vast amounts of varying opinions.
Human characters are never going to be the majority here, so, it's whatever. They won't be an issue for you or I if FA gets around to implementing the blacklist like literally everyone has agreed is necessary.
Anyway, posting it in the thread for ya.
Artists have a right in my opinion to draw furry artwork of what they like when it doesn't involve actual kids or target kids. Viewers have a right based on their irl age what kind of content they want to be subject to. The blacklist is so important cause it's just not fair to content creators to have to tip toe around a viewers preferences.
Exactly. It's sad that things have come to this, especially right now in this horrible puritan zeitgeist we're all suffering.
Or another popular one is works of transformation where the human shifts into a non-human.
===
But overall I agree with a lot of your points, particularly in that FA should have better protection around minors that is beyond just "Can only see SFW tags" because FA's tagging system and other users are blind to whether another account is under age.
So my gallery for example has like 90% NSFW pieces, if I get a note from a stranger it'd easy for me to assume they're consumers of the NSFW space. I often have to remind myself it could be a minor reaching out to me for something about the 10% of art that I post.
If I could opt for it, i'd rather my account be totally invisible or blocked from being viewed by (And vise versa) minor's accounts until they're of legal age.
The only thing I can honestly think of for the minors on the site, making it 18+ won't do anything since they can lie about their age, is prove they are at least 18. Proof of being 18 is in the government issued ID and perhaps to help against fake IDs being privately submitted, alongside the ID they have to submit a photo of a bill or bank statement (account numbers obviously covered up for rights to privacy) with both names matching. Under the age of 18 it's not possible to have a bill or account that's not joint. If it's a joint account shown it's obviously a minor then and can only see sfw content.
To further beat the point, that leaves artists and image submissions to be properly labeled to keep NSFW out of sfw. 1 of 2 things needs to happen, if not both. 1, the artist has to properly tag the content. It's a little subjective but for the part, if you have to question the rating or whether you'd do it in a public space/in front of your parents or anothers, its best to label it in the very least as MATURE, so minors cant see it. If the artists and uploaders fail to tag correctly, then warnings should be given and staff should correct the content rating tag for them. Which leads into number 2, staff needs to be competent and willing to do the job of actively sort through new content to abide by that guideline. There are bot programs that can detect certain adult or mature content and flag it for review. Said bot can be told to look for that content and flag it for review while simultaneously looking at content ratings so if the content of the image or links does not match the rating given, the system will flag only those for review AND automatically hide the post from everyone but the creator
So implementing something like a bot vetting / flagging submissions I imagine would be a technical challenge for them.
I'd be all for vetting IDs, but that's also require individuals to trust FA to not abuse their privacy and IRL identity and I'm curious if FA would be willing to pay for the labor to affirm those identities. Or at at least see if it looks like an authentic image. Though no process is going to be 100% guaranteed, plenty of clever/savy/delinquent <18 year olds can figure out work arounds or borrow other's identities.
I recall articles talking about China's restrictions on kid gaming accounts (Few hours / week or something) and they were getting around restrictions by either getting fake Ids or acquiring/paying for accounts from adults.
Simply just disallowing self-reporting kids might help the actually unaware and honest ones from accidentially encountering content they weren't expecting or looking for.
To experiment, I made a 13 y/o account earlier just to see what a potential minor might see on FA's infamous front page and it's pretty bad. Another problem is that FA shows the most recent submissions before there's any kind of vetting or reporting by other adult users or moderators. An honest uploader could misclick and self-correct the submission with a minute and it might already be on a minor's screen. The site really isn't good for accounts that intend to use the site exclusively for SFW purposes and want to 100% avoid NSFW content.
As to the kids getting around, yes it's sad but they will for those who want to jump through those hoops. But then, this site is primarily paid for by ads, FA+ and artist sponsors. I suspect if site owners don't act in best interest of their primary funding and community, it'll all crumble as no one will want to pay them to not supervise and invest in their creation. Mods and admins have both a moral and financial obligation to their supporters, to ban accounts that are found out to belong to minors parading as adults.
Sadly there's just as much danger to adults if site isn't managed better to limit minor activity, and punish it when it's in violation of fair policy. A minor can skirt the rules and policy and wind up either intentionally or accidentally causing a ton of trouble and grief to an adult. That is why they owe it to the community to DO THE JOB, to protect everyone. To protect minors from predatory adults and protect adults from predatory kids acting on their hormones.
I have little faith in site staff as well, but unless they want the site to kick the bucket sooner rather than later, they need to act accordingly. Content bans on "childish or young" activity/looking artwork isn't a protection, its an abuse of power attacking creations/creators they don't like. Protection, is doing their job managing the site, carding users new and old, listening to constructive feedback, and moderating (not dictating) content ratings.
And indeed, I whole heartedly agree. I had quite a bit of issue in that the initial policy was brought out due to "community feedback" but when they have a massive backlash that seems to be against the policy in one form or another, them not really taking any action to the feedback in any way certianly smells of ulterior motives. Aside from their most recent rewording of the pregnancy thing which was more of a side tangent to the issues most people are taking concern with.