some people >v>

Yorp.

Blorp.

is tru

Heh, a good advice from your "everyday" group. x3

We try. :)

Heheh, indeed. ^w^

Did I miss a memo?

Furry drama involving well-known artists getting suspended because of witch hunts. It's getting sorted out. But the principle still stands. It's something people need to be reminded of every now and then.

Huh. I guess I just don't follow enough stuff to catch the drama.

As long as fatal vore is cool, I'm happy though. (eat me!) :3

Yeah, so far fatal vore's safe. But it's good to stand up for other things as they're being hit since fatal vore is also a fringe fetish interest and thus also subject to the same potential persecution.

Agreed (for the most part, and I'll leave it at that).


Vore is love. Fatal vore is love! Digestion is LOVE!

For me the whole Vore thing is just an Online thing. Since its absolutly not a thing to establish in RL the way I like it without interferring with the laws and a lot of other things. Not to mention that my sona/otherkin side also just exists in my head and is nothing to be physical and im not a fan of human on human vore so...
For me its just a thing to enjoy online in the internets, throu art and Rp's, when I have the time to do so. X3

And luckily im wasnt hit with drama in that case aswell.

At this point it's funny to try and imagine how different things would be if soft vore was possible IRL. And someday long from now it actually will be... genetic modification advances like all technology, but let's not get ahead of ourselves here. If anything that's "too offensive IRL" (based on the feelings of some self-important snowflakes) is a crime to draw, and vore ever became a controversy... I'd actually expect those fanatics to demand that decades of online vore art are erased from the internet because it's enabling real criminals or molesters.

Before that though, I'd expect Inkbunny to also have to ban cub art because it's no longer fantasy. That is once real life anthros would exist, which is far more certain and early than the first idea (be it a few decades away still). There will likely come a day when we'll go to IB and see the message "we're sorry, but you can't draw cubs in naughty situations any more... real anthros exist so now it's too realistic thus offensive, the thought police might arrest us". We live in a disturbed wonderland.

Soft vore is possible IRL, just not with human prey. Unfortunately there are some people who don't draw appropriate boundaries between fiction and IRL animal abuse.

Yeah, for sure. I'm sure for most people it's just an online thing. But some people use the online vore community for part or all of their livelihood, so to go after them for fantasy garbage they create is just unconscionable.

Its kinda ironic how the people who so badly want harmless loving and caring vore decide to get vulgar and violent when the its vore that isn't endo.
Kinda hypocritical of them.

Yeah. Some of the most brutal people in the fandom are endo lovers. But I imagine a lot of that is a violent emotional reaction to seeing something they don't like or mistakenly believe is morally wrong.

Not to dip my toe into that pond, but its really bold of them to talk about moralls and then being in the fandom at all.
Cause there is alot in this fandom and not just the fetishes, the tame stuff too that could be viewed as morally wrong once you break it all down.

Depends on your moral system (particularly whether you get your morals from religion or not), but yes.

If all vore is porn and anything involving young characters is therefore considered pedo, then I can think of a lot more artists that FA should technically be banning, some of whom have been uploading such content for over a decade now.

With those people it's a miracle that vore is allowed at all. Shouldn't all artists who draw fatal vore be classified as murderers, and all vore images labeled "murder enabling material"? I mean that seems to be the psychology of those people... it can't magically apply to just one thing right?

I think there are only two ways to go with the "Is vore porn?" question:

1) All vore is porn because some people get sexually aroused by it. Therefore literally everything is porn because literally everything sexually arouses at least one person.
2) Vore is often a fetish material to a niche population but is not inherently porn unless mixed with pornographic elements themselves.

Obviously the second is the more reasonable of the two, but both are tenable positions to hold. You can't really go in between, though, and only classify some non-porn fetishes as porn and not others, especially since not all vore artists find sexual arousal through it.

The mention of "pornographic elements themselves" makes me want to either define or dispel the idea of any objectively pornographic elements. Even that seducy face people make when they want to be be kinky, even regular full on sex, they can be viewed and sold as non-pornographic. The sex scene from Requiem For A Dream was absolutely not pornographic, despite being regular sex had for the enjoyment of both participants.
That in mind, it sounds like either all vore (and like you said, all things) needs to be called pornographic, or no vore is pornographic.
Wait actually that's kinda broken, revising. Vore is a label that can not determine if something is porn or not porn, so is wolves, so is sex. (according to the definition I know of porn at least) They are only colors, porn can have vore and non porn can have vore.
I guess I'm beating around the bush about what I think porn is, and I guess that's sort of inconsiderate since I know there are differing ideas of what should be called porn. I think it's safest to say that something created with the intention of sexually arousing people is porn. I know that'd ultimately mean that two identical pictures can be made and one is porn while the other is not, because the makers' intent is not always visible to the audience, but that just means that it's hard to tell sometimes if something is porn or isn't porn, and that's okay. This is only about this one definition, I also think it's still okay for the word porn to be used to label things that are not "porn" as per the previous definition, because a lot of my porn wasn't created to be "porn". But that's within my own head. My most important claim here is that we can't rightfully say that someone else's art is objectively porn, no matter how suggestive it is, no matter how many kinks it touches or how generically recognizable its sexiness is, not unless the artist intended for it to arouse people. Because it might instead be an ironic statement piece, and if we're speaking for everyone and not just ourselves then we can't label those ourselves.

While that definition does make some degree of sense and could be considered valid, I want to point out that things drawn/designed to be titillating could be considered porn under that umbrella. The very existence of Laura from Street Fighter 5 would be considered pornographic.
I think that's why the legal definition varies so much. One judge in the United States stated "I'll know it when I see it" some time back, which is very non-legalistic.

To be honest, though, I wish people would just get the sticks out of their asses about most things involving sexuality (Unless they like that sorta thing, of course :P ). If it causes real harm, then it's an issue. If not, then it's no one's business but those involved.

When it's a random person doing it, you can brush it off as "some people are pretty crazy". When it's the administration of an important website taking part in it, A.K.A. people who are looked up to and expected to know better, you have to classify it as "the world has gone insane".

FA staff have NEVER been known for being good at their jobs. :3

Incorrect.

The world has only gone insane if the vast majority of people do it. If it's a small group of people, even if they have power, then things still aren't at that point.

Besides, it's very possible the FA admins were jut lazy and didn't look into all the angles necessary to make their decision, instead relying on a gut reaction and ignoring the consequences to the real people who own the account.