FA+
Shop
This Product No Longer Contains E-Numbers
15 years ago
Evening, all.
I had a yardstick, once. I'd know that I'd 'arrived' as a furry, that my wayward pursuit of art was actually worth a damn, when one of my tawdry slices of fap-fodder made its way to e621's gargantuan wankbank for mass-consumption. Somewhat worthwhile, anyway.
So you can imagine my lack of mirth when I find this morning that the site has imploded under the weight of its own paedophilia. Which I suppose is kinda fair enough... sort of. Why they didn't see fit to moderate the weird Japanese kiddy porn out is beyond me, but then I don't have a vested interest in seeing fictional children get diddled, so what would I know, right?
e621 was a genuinely excellent repository, though. The site's design made it wonderfully elegant at both hunting down exisiting favourites and discovering the wares of some new and enticing hotshots. I've lost count of the number of talented folks I found through that site, and its loss is just that: a genuine loss. Right now there's nothing out there that really compares.
All this leaves me wondering, though: FurAffinity has neatly sidestepped this loli nonsense by, well, outlawing it. And that's great, really it is! Or rather, I should say it's a great start.
As many have waxed lyrical about before, there is a proliferation of so-called 'cub' art on this site which, well...
Allow me to give to a little detailed insight, which I know you neither asked for nor really wanted, as to how my mind operates on a sexual level, particularly with regards to our beloved anthropornmorphics [sic].
Many have said that furry porn is tantamount to bestiality, and yet in the case of the sort of stuff I'm into - namely bipedal anthropomophic females - I can clearly argue that this is not the case. The key word here is 'anthropomorphic', which to paraphrase the dictionary definition, is to imbue a subject with human characteristics. Human, people. That there's the crux of it: that essence of humanity is what seperates harmlessly titillating furry porn from ghastly outright dogfuckery. Most animals are adorable - I've been around them in various forms for most of my life, and their companionship is a valuable thing to have. Yet I, and hopefully you, would never consider putting on some Marvin Gaye and taking the term 'doggystyle' that bit too literally.
Likewise, I'm not into depictions of children in sexual encounters. I don't really get how anyone could be: children are fucking horrible (and, I've heard it argued, horrible at fucking) - but humanity is nothing if not strange and myriad and strangely myriad.
Both of these physical activities are, in most developed countries, quite illegal - the latter may generally carry a heavier penalty than the former, but the point remains that they're a heaping helping of wrong. The argument can be, and frequently is made that artificial depictions of these acts are purely in the realm of fantasy, that the consumers of said material would never dream of acting it out for real. Well, actually I suppose they do dream of it, but... you get the idea. My riposte is simple and sharp: I don't want to see that shit. Quite apart from my moral objections in the UK (where I used to live) and Germany (where I currently live), it's pretty damned illegal. Go specialise someplace else.
TO RECAP: Here's some moral mathematics. Please note this down in your copybooks, as you'll be expected to know this for your GCSEs next summer:
Actually, it might be 2WRONG. It's been a long time since I did serious maths.
Now, I'm guilty of perusing the darker corners of the interwebs - e621, FurAffinity, 4chan and their ilk - and quietly ignoring the seediest of aspects that abhor me. I'm not from the internet police, and frankly I'm too lazy to start filling out complaint tickets for every little thing that doesn't fall within my sphere of morality. I suspect I am not alone in having this outlook on the Interporns.
Thus, while you can argue that e621's demise is a product of its own moderation, you have to wonder why FurAffinity isn't under similar scrutiny. And before I get the 'cub art is not paedophilia' schtick: stop. Scroll a few lines upward. We've done the maths, people. Cub art is either double-wrong or wrong squared, depending on your outlook on sums.
THUS - and this is the point I've been trying to make all along, so bloody well pay attention: should it not be that a site like FurAffinity is held to the same moral standards as a site like e621? People (by which I mean Americans) like to bang on about freedom of expression, usually at the expense of taste and decency, and while it's not a sentiment I entirely agree with, I do believe that if it is to be applied, it should be applied unilaterally.
But mostly, I'm annoyed because I'll never get to read the immortal line "TITTIES MAKE ME ANGRYYYY" in its natural habitat, ever again.
Also, why do you Americans insist on spelling it 'pedophilia'? You do realise that's an obsession with walking, right? A pedometer is not going to help you cruise for underage boys. Just sayin', yo.
tl;dr - Either bring back e621 or ban cub porn from FurAffinity. Or close FurAffinity, if you're a 'going down with the ship' kind of person.
A post about my moving to Germany (and possible eventual commissions, if I ever get off my arse) will follow at some point soon. Can't all be about the cub-fuckin', after all. WHAT ABOUT ME?
I had a yardstick, once. I'd know that I'd 'arrived' as a furry, that my wayward pursuit of art was actually worth a damn, when one of my tawdry slices of fap-fodder made its way to e621's gargantuan wankbank for mass-consumption. Somewhat worthwhile, anyway.
So you can imagine my lack of mirth when I find this morning that the site has imploded under the weight of its own paedophilia. Which I suppose is kinda fair enough... sort of. Why they didn't see fit to moderate the weird Japanese kiddy porn out is beyond me, but then I don't have a vested interest in seeing fictional children get diddled, so what would I know, right?
e621 was a genuinely excellent repository, though. The site's design made it wonderfully elegant at both hunting down exisiting favourites and discovering the wares of some new and enticing hotshots. I've lost count of the number of talented folks I found through that site, and its loss is just that: a genuine loss. Right now there's nothing out there that really compares.
All this leaves me wondering, though: FurAffinity has neatly sidestepped this loli nonsense by, well, outlawing it. And that's great, really it is! Or rather, I should say it's a great start.
As many have waxed lyrical about before, there is a proliferation of so-called 'cub' art on this site which, well...
Allow me to give to a little detailed insight, which I know you neither asked for nor really wanted, as to how my mind operates on a sexual level, particularly with regards to our beloved anthropornmorphics [sic].
Many have said that furry porn is tantamount to bestiality, and yet in the case of the sort of stuff I'm into - namely bipedal anthropomophic females - I can clearly argue that this is not the case. The key word here is 'anthropomorphic', which to paraphrase the dictionary definition, is to imbue a subject with human characteristics. Human, people. That there's the crux of it: that essence of humanity is what seperates harmlessly titillating furry porn from ghastly outright dogfuckery. Most animals are adorable - I've been around them in various forms for most of my life, and their companionship is a valuable thing to have. Yet I, and hopefully you, would never consider putting on some Marvin Gaye and taking the term 'doggystyle' that bit too literally.
Likewise, I'm not into depictions of children in sexual encounters. I don't really get how anyone could be: children are fucking horrible (and, I've heard it argued, horrible at fucking) - but humanity is nothing if not strange and myriad and strangely myriad.
Both of these physical activities are, in most developed countries, quite illegal - the latter may generally carry a heavier penalty than the former, but the point remains that they're a heaping helping of wrong. The argument can be, and frequently is made that artificial depictions of these acts are purely in the realm of fantasy, that the consumers of said material would never dream of acting it out for real. Well, actually I suppose they do dream of it, but... you get the idea. My riposte is simple and sharp: I don't want to see that shit. Quite apart from my moral objections in the UK (where I used to live) and Germany (where I currently live), it's pretty damned illegal. Go specialise someplace else.
TO RECAP: Here's some moral mathematics. Please note this down in your copybooks, as you'll be expected to know this for your GCSEs next summer:
sex + children = WRONG
sex + animals = WRONG
∴ sex + (children × animals) = WRONG²Actually, it might be 2WRONG. It's been a long time since I did serious maths.
Now, I'm guilty of perusing the darker corners of the interwebs - e621, FurAffinity, 4chan and their ilk - and quietly ignoring the seediest of aspects that abhor me. I'm not from the internet police, and frankly I'm too lazy to start filling out complaint tickets for every little thing that doesn't fall within my sphere of morality. I suspect I am not alone in having this outlook on the Interporns.
Thus, while you can argue that e621's demise is a product of its own moderation, you have to wonder why FurAffinity isn't under similar scrutiny. And before I get the 'cub art is not paedophilia' schtick: stop. Scroll a few lines upward. We've done the maths, people. Cub art is either double-wrong or wrong squared, depending on your outlook on sums.
THUS - and this is the point I've been trying to make all along, so bloody well pay attention: should it not be that a site like FurAffinity is held to the same moral standards as a site like e621? People (by which I mean Americans) like to bang on about freedom of expression, usually at the expense of taste and decency, and while it's not a sentiment I entirely agree with, I do believe that if it is to be applied, it should be applied unilaterally.
But mostly, I'm annoyed because I'll never get to read the immortal line "TITTIES MAKE ME ANGRYYYY" in its natural habitat, ever again.
Also, why do you Americans insist on spelling it 'pedophilia'? You do realise that's an obsession with walking, right? A pedometer is not going to help you cruise for underage boys. Just sayin', yo.
tl;dr - Either bring back e621 or ban cub porn from FurAffinity. Or close FurAffinity, if you're a 'going down with the ship' kind of person.
A post about my moving to Germany (and possible eventual commissions, if I ever get off my arse) will follow at some point soon. Can't all be about the cub-fuckin', after all. WHAT ABOUT ME?
Nevertheless, I like your writing style.
But I disagree with your conclusion. If no real person is being affected or hurt, then no real question of morality exists. Questions of morality for fictional works are entirely hypothetical. Not that I like either cub or loli, but I will defend their right to exist for simply that reason. Whether they exist here on FA or elsewhere, though, I don't really care.