FA+
Shop
Note on the New FA Rules (I'm Still Here!)
2 years ago
"I will not die until I achieve something. Even though the ideal is high, I never give in. Therefore, I never die with regrets."
As some of you might have seen, FA are trying to desperately rewrite some rules concerning "child-like" or "child-proportioned" characters, and made an absolute fuckbungle of it.
From what I've seen, there has been basically no conference with artists for various styles such as chibi or those specialising in adult "shortstack" types. They admitted on their May 22nd update that it came when not all the mods were available, and as such made things more confusing.
But then the actual clarification came, and it's somehow WORSE. The real gem I love, to demonstrate the absolute hypocrisy is right here.
"Minors may not be fetishized. Minors younger than 13 may not be depicted as pregnant."
What? I really hope that was a typo, because whoever dares to draw a 14-year old pregnant lynx is gonna have a great argument set up ahead of them cuz last I checked, 14-17 year olds are still generally considered minors!
UPDATE ON MAY 24:
Okay, now THIS is funny, they actually did get their ass called out to now state:
"Content featuring minors is not allowed when the minor is in the presence of sexual activity, sexual objects, or nudity, though exceptions may be made for non-sexual depictions of birth and breastfeeding. Presence is defined as being in the same scene, such as sharing a comic panel, contiguous image, reference sheet, or specific section of a story where characters are engaging each other."
Okay, what possible exception is there for "non-sexual depictions of birth and breastfeeding"? Do they mean "as long as you never show the front side of the mother, it's fine"?
Luckily, I'm not affected, since the rules say nothing about writing, and they constantly talk about "proportions" which you can't really present in text form! It's like how Game of Thrones' novels can be sold on shelves despite featuring underaged sex and violence, it's not a visual medium so therefore it's only as perverted as the person reading it, and not the creator, irregardless of the context.
Which is itself a hypocritical mindset, and further proves to me that this is nothing about moral standards and kinkshaming. It's entirely about marketability, and trying to weirdly, make a furry site more appealing to investors.
Which flies in the face of everything that is furry, the whole point of our community is we are unmarketable, we are self-sufficient and keep our own economy rolling around in a circle.
It saddens me that artists are once again getting fucked over by this incredibly lazy rule, that casts too wide a net to catch a few tiny pervert fish, and end up strangling everyone else.
TL;DR, I'm not going anywhere, because FA has never given a shit about writers, so whatever characters I write about are still perfectly safe, because you can't see them if I write them.
That said, I do have a Sofurry account in case FA decides to go Furry Twitter (which makes the blue checkmark joke they did even sadder foreshadowing).
From what I've seen, there has been basically no conference with artists for various styles such as chibi or those specialising in adult "shortstack" types. They admitted on their May 22nd update that it came when not all the mods were available, and as such made things more confusing.
But then the actual clarification came, and it's somehow WORSE. The real gem I love, to demonstrate the absolute hypocrisy is right here.
"Minors may not be fetishized. Minors younger than 13 may not be depicted as pregnant."
What? I really hope that was a typo, because whoever dares to draw a 14-year old pregnant lynx is gonna have a great argument set up ahead of them cuz last I checked, 14-17 year olds are still generally considered minors!
UPDATE ON MAY 24:
Okay, now THIS is funny, they actually did get their ass called out to now state:
"Content featuring minors is not allowed when the minor is in the presence of sexual activity, sexual objects, or nudity, though exceptions may be made for non-sexual depictions of birth and breastfeeding. Presence is defined as being in the same scene, such as sharing a comic panel, contiguous image, reference sheet, or specific section of a story where characters are engaging each other."
Okay, what possible exception is there for "non-sexual depictions of birth and breastfeeding"? Do they mean "as long as you never show the front side of the mother, it's fine"?
Luckily, I'm not affected, since the rules say nothing about writing, and they constantly talk about "proportions" which you can't really present in text form! It's like how Game of Thrones' novels can be sold on shelves despite featuring underaged sex and violence, it's not a visual medium so therefore it's only as perverted as the person reading it, and not the creator, irregardless of the context.
Which is itself a hypocritical mindset, and further proves to me that this is nothing about moral standards and kinkshaming. It's entirely about marketability, and trying to weirdly, make a furry site more appealing to investors.
Which flies in the face of everything that is furry, the whole point of our community is we are unmarketable, we are self-sufficient and keep our own economy rolling around in a circle.
It saddens me that artists are once again getting fucked over by this incredibly lazy rule, that casts too wide a net to catch a few tiny pervert fish, and end up strangling everyone else.
TL;DR, I'm not going anywhere, because FA has never given a shit about writers, so whatever characters I write about are still perfectly safe, because you can't see them if I write them.
That said, I do have a Sofurry account in case FA decides to go Furry Twitter (which makes the blue checkmark joke they did even sadder foreshadowing).
Anthos
~anthos
I'm not going anywhere either. Ain't found a way to kill me yet.
