But...but I could swear they were real...

You mean you didn't just put a lit, smoking pipe into my home via a computer linked to the internet?

My idea of reality has been shattered...

yeah, you always lived in a matrix, man! *lumpe*

When did that change?! 0_0

You mean to tell me reality is reality now? I thought pixels were 4 rlz!

So.

Fucking.

True.

I was thinking about this the whole time. You read my mind.

p.d. Magritte was right.

That's absolutely brillant !

If you seriously think this is the issue you are stupid as heck

the issue is some damn person like you complained because they thought it caused people to want to have sex with children...only.....considering its FURRY i don't believe thats possible so you sir are "stupid as heck"

i don't even care anymore. it's over; we won. good game, nerd.

Can't win if there's no game being played.

Check.

Three reasons why you lost. These are just insults, but they're very good insults made through observations.
1) You feel that people can't be trusted to determine right from wrong and must be incredibly paranoid...
2) Based on the first assumption we can assume you're an arrogant prick who thinks they're smarter than everyone else.
3) Based on the second assumption you either have no friends or the friends you do have are as shallow as you. Birds of a feather and all.

And now, just for extra credit on why you lost.
4) The game.

As for why the ban is unfounded and idiotic.
1) You assume your reason is the only reason anyone would ever look at cub art. It's entirely possible that this may be the case but it's not always the case. Some people may not look at cub art because of the desire to victimize children but merely to emphasize with them. There is a bit of a thrill in having someone much larger than yourself man handle you (not afraid to admit that) and this could just as easily be why they'd look at such art or even fantasize over such material for sexual pleasure.

2) If we ban everything because of one, and might I add highly theoretical, reason then most if not everything you enjoy in your life would be illegal. Can't have over the counter medicine because people might use that to get high. Can't have violence on TV or Games because children might shoot up the school. And not just TV shows, you can't air anything about guns in the news. School shooting I just mentioned? Sorry, Fox, CNN, HLN, whoever, they're not allowed to say anything about it on air because some stupid kid might up and think it's a good idea and BANG! Another school school shooting. Finally, and while this is racist and I apologize, I say this next one not to insult but to show just how blatantly ignorant such a stance is. Black people shouldn't be allowed to own weapons because of OJ. See my point? The potential for evil doesn't justify such a stance. Yes, some people might see this art, and yes, those people might hurt children, but I seriously don't think they hurt children as a result of art. The same urge to look into this material is the same urge that's going to ultimately lead them to hurting children in the first place and this urge comes before the fact, not after.

Now for reasons the ban SHOULD be placed... Sorry, I'm not looking at this issue from just one side, guys. I take all points into consideration as I feel only a mind that's open to counter reasoning has any weight at all in such matters.
1) This is the only reason I haven't mentioned previously but it is a decisive one. FA is being strong armed into banning it by the organization who handles their funds. Either FA does as they're told or... Well, it would be a shame of something were to happen to this wonderful site. *hint hint* That said, I really wish FA could find someone else to do business with who wouldn't interfere like that. If they did the ban would most likely be lifted as I believe the staff doesn't favor the ban any more than I do.

So yeah, that's all the angles and the one reason I tolerate the ban at all. It's also another great reason you haven't won. This little 'game' as you want to call it was declared a no contest because of the interference of a third party and you were handed the so called 'win.

PS. I realize this is a year old picture. Don't care, had to say it.

Hmmm.. If you stare at it for long enough... it sort of looks like a pipe.

It is not a pipe, but anyone who faps to it is a pipe fetishist.

Sooo~

So very true. I wish more people in our society could understand that. The really strange thing is that most individuals do understand that the picture of the pipe is not a real pipe, but they disagree on the picture of the child. That's how they justify their own pictures showing gore, rape, violence, drug use, stealing, snuff, etc., while getting bent out of shape if someone posts anything with a child in it. That's a way of thinking I just can't understand. How did we end up in a world where so many people really can't see the difference?

By "our society" do you mean the furry fandom? Because unless I have been missing out on some big news, drawn CP isn't really one of the raging debates of Western society. I'd imagine most people haven't even considered that it exists.

I meant society, as in the average person in the western world. They see a drawing with children in them, and those pictures might as well be photos of real children to them. If a picture depicts a child in an act that they think is wrong, they equate it with that act actually happening with a real child. If the drawing is of a furry cub doing the supposedly wrong act, people still say it is the same as if it was a real human child. Society fears sexuality and children overlapping to the point where they go way beyond common sense to prevent it. They have a paranoid fear that anything that reminds them of children and of sex will become real, no matter how impossible or unlikely it would be. They don't think rationally that paper and ink are not alive. They won't think rationally that if someone is drawing a furry cub having sex, that the person is probably not even into humans. If they were, then they'd surely be more inclined to draw humans. Even then the drawings are still not real. Most people simply can't separate fake from real if either sex or children are involved. If something has childlike attributes, such as a fury cub, those same people see them as human children. Western society is raging over anything that even remotely reminds them of child porn. It's hard to watch the nightly news for an hour without hearing about child porn, or the often irrational fear of it.

Those who even look at such fictitious art are accused of being sick, even though furs don't actually exist, furs are not humans, and drawings are not real. Those who draw such art are often accused of being pedophiles. The reality is that most people who draw such art, or look at it, are not pedophiles. Saying that someone is a pedophile because they like to draw cub porn, or even human child porn, is like saying that they are a murderer for drawing snuff images or gun porn, or a drug user for drawing someone smoking a joint. If I were to draw someone smoking, it wouldn't mean I liked cigarettes.. Artists draw vore. I don't see them going out and tying to eat anyone! Why not? Maybe it's because what they draw with ink and paper isn't real. That fact doesn't magically change when the subject involves cubs or children.

BTW, I fully support the decision that Dragoneer had to make, even though I like some of the art that is now banned. I do not like the conditions that forced him to do it though. He did the best he could for the site in a lose-lose scenario. Up to 10 percent of the art I've faved falls under the ban and will soon be gone. But, having the site go under, or perhaps putting limits on bandwidth usage, due to insufficient ability to collect donations would be far worse in my opinion. The ban wasn't done in an effort to censor anything. It was done to keep the site financially viable and free for all of us. Well actually it isn't free to those of us who donate, but I think we get a lot in return for our money. Am I correct in assuming that this is the largest collection of free fury art on the net? If not, it has to be very close to the largest. The fact that it stays free amazes me.

Too long di...Too long didn't r-.... Dammit. I can't skip this! This is a well structured argument and I agree completely with its logic! Well done good sir.

I agree with pretty much everything but the 'not pedo's for looking at cub porn bit' considering that pedophillia just by itself is an attraction to children and you're looking at something that is very child-like in the end.

It's just like when I look at my snuff, I'm not a muderer, more the victim, which is an expression of my suicidal tendancies.

It may all just be fantasy, but at the same time, surely you're not helping this image if you're too scared to accept a perfectly apt description due to it's negative press?

Keep in mind that I don't see a connection between art of cute toony fur-covered creatures with muzzles, ears, and tails, and art of somewhat boring, and even ugly skin-covered human children. I do not look at furry cub art and fantasize over a human child while masturbating. Instead, I'm fantasizing over being an anthro toony character, being with such a character, being with a fursuit of such a character, or being with a plushie of the character. In no part of my fantasies do icky human bags of featureless skin come to mind. Generally, a good way for me to go limp would be to think of humans while trying to masturbate. This applies regardless of the age of the human. I think I can accurately say that I'm not a pedo for looking at cub art. Only about 5 to 10 percent of the cub art I look at can even be considered as porn. Even there, my thoughts and fantasies are purely towards non-existent furry critters, fursuits, plushies, or even certain pieces of winter clothing that I have a fetish for. I happily accept a lot of labels for what I'm into, based on the reality of what I'm into. I've made this stuff publicly available on my webpage since early in 1994, and it was common knowledge on many BBSs since the early 1980s. In other worlds, I'm a plushophile, a texturphile, a fursuitophile, a furry toonophile, and an all around furvert. I even like watersports and some other stuff that the press would enjoy laughing over. I've even been in the press, by my own doing, and had no fear in dealing with the small percentage of negative reaction. I'm not ashamed at all of what I like, nor of admitting it. One thing that someone can't say about me is that I'm a pedophile though. That would require at least some sort of fantasy attraction to kids. Actually, the term is only accurate for someone who is into pre-pubescent kids. Personally, I'm just not sexually attracted to humans, regardless of their age. I can be intellectually attracted to humans in some cases, but those tend to be of the over 30 crowd. I am attracted to clothing, and have a handful of clothing-related fetishes. I prefer the style of clothing I saw being worn when I was a teenager, that I didn't get to own for myself. I also like colorful clothes and thick winter clothes, which tend to be more commonly worn by some women, and even by some kids. Denim shortalls and such come to mind. The attraction here is purely to the clothes though, and I'd greatly prefer that there not be anyone wearing them while I enjoying them. One big exception is if I am sharing the fetish with another like-minded adult. Most people don't figure these sorts of fetishes out until they are older than 30 or 40. Simply put, no matter what someone might think, I am not aroused by humans, or human kids. I'm not aroused by skin contact, nor even nudity, at any age. A quick browse through my faves will show lots of furry cub art. A small percentage of the art I fave is also porn, but not of human cubs. If I do fave any human character, it is because or what they are wearing, and not because I want to have sex with them. It makes me weird, and it makes me a furvert, but one has to be more than somewhat attracted to children in order to be a pedophile.

If I could make my best fantasies real, I would. I'd be living in a totally furry toony wold, and there would be no human kids there, and probably very few, if any human adults. I will add that I know many people who look at cub porn who are pedophiles. I know this because they told me that they fantasize over kids, in addition to their fury desires. It doesn't make them actual child-molesters though, any more than snuff art makes you a murderer. In my own case, I just don't have enough of an attraction to humans or human kids to be forming fantasies over them. What would honestly be the point when a nice plushie brings me far closer to what I like to think about and enjoy? I think a pedophile can't help thinking about what they like. They hopefully don't make it real though. I know that I can't stop thinking about the things I like. I'm just thankful that I can easily sit in a bus full of school children and my mind would be on a raccoon plushie that I left at home, rather than on the noisy bags of dirty skin packed in the bus around me! The most weird thing of all is that I don't even know how to generate fantasize over a human kid. What does one think about to make themselves get off. I simply has to be furry for me.

Yes, you made that rather explict, it doesn't change the fact that their still furry kids rather than furry grown ups >.> XD

I'm not saying your wrong at all or bashing cub art, just saying.

Then Uk gobernement banned all imagen despicting childrens (cub include)

"These are not the twin towers"

"This is not a conspiracy to kill"

"These are not signs of an insane individual"

"They are only lines on a piece of paper."

Reality vs drawn characters have a stark difference, my friend.

You may argue all you want, but a fictional character that doesn't exist has no "age" - you may choose to represent a drawn picture of a furry (which is imaginary) as a cub and not molest any real children, so I don't see what's with all these drama whores that like to complain about how immoral drawn imagination is.

Also, I'm pretty sure there are plenty other fetishes that are being ignored right now that are just as equally bad as cub porn.

A fictional character has what the creator attributes with it. You are right about other fetishes being "ignored" (huge case in point being snuff) but that doesn't justify anything. Please do not call me a "drama whore," the phrase itself is an over-exaggeration made by opposing parties for people they do not like. I don't care so much about cub art itself, but I think the argument that something being just "lines on a piece of paper" is dangerously simple minded.

Also, it seems I accidentally hid my own comment. I apologize

I didn't call you specifically a drama whore, I pointed out that there are people who do whore drama about cub art, but to be truthful, there's really no point in trying to act Mr Thought Police when it comes to imagination.

I mean, come on - imaginary characters that don't hurt the mentality (Let's have it like this for now, as an example) of 'in real life' people are now outlawed on FA just because it symbolizes something? It's just art. It isn't "srs bsns" and it certainly isn't 'in real life'.
Personally, I couldn't give a rats arse about furries fapping to cub porn, because it's all drawn. As soon as a real kid is involved, then it gets serious, but apart from that, it's tiring seeing people go on about "how terrible this drawn fetish is compared to the next".

From what I've heard the "outlaw" of cub porn was actually a business decision made by fa admins, but I don't know the details behind that. My thoughts on cub porn mostly range from "Don't give a shit" to "Nowhere near as bad as snuff" So I have no comment on your thoughts, maybe except to say that the only reason it would be brought up is it relativity to cp.

Actually, they're not lines on a paper, either. They're photons that I perceive through my eyes. For all I know, you drew this using a realistic drawing program that required no paper at all.

it´s actually drawn on real traditional old-skool paper.

Just saying, the world is a strange place. Reality is one step ahead of the observer, and all that.

that might be true...

It is an idea Mr Creedy..and ideas ARE BOOLET PROOOOF"

Oh, dammit! I was going to do a drawing like this!

Doesn't it feel just great to live in a country where you can be arrested for lines on a piece of paper, but the government's airport thugs can cup your son's nutsack without repercussions?

hey, let´s be happy to live in this time- some decades ago comics were burnt in america like...like witches! wahey!

And then not change their rubber gloves before cupping yours!

Ew. Not my idea of a father/son get-together!

^THIS!!

No, according to some, it's a thought crime :C

But in this line of thinking, aren't any other gloryfied depictions of illegal activities thought crimes, too.

And society survived them, didn't it?

"Think of the children" is only a valid argument when it is about actual people, instead of hunting drawings down they should invest the money in better education.

This is not a spoon.

There is no spoon.

Precisely.

This is probably one of the better responses to the ban I have seen so far

it's merely art, Those who act upon it are the criminals
those who draw it are only putting lines on paper..

But.. if we draw a picture of our 'sona Blowing up an American icon.. Its free speech..

Oh my god... This is getting me so hot. I'm so fucking horny right now! This drawing is making me want to break into a tobacco shop and RAPE SOME PIPES!!!

Well, as long as the picture of the cub didn't inspire you to rape little children, I don't see a problem with that.

Oh, well that too. Obviously, whenever I look at a picture of anything, I am unable to control my desire to go out and rape it. Pipes, children, dogs, houses, cars, celebrities, your mother... you name it! Normally, I'm very much against rape and understand the horrible mental scarring it can cause a victim, but when I see a picture of something, whoa boy! All my inborn human morality just vanishes! Isn't everyone like that?*





*Really, really heavy sarcasm.

win!!

You're a hero!

So true!

Didn't you hear? Lines are dangerous. They inspire people to do bad things in the real world.

So there. I proved you wrong.

End of sarcasm.

yes. i agree.

THIS IS MADNESS!!

This is stupid.

I just have to say, I am not a fan of cub art at all, in spite of my love of weirder things (see asphyxiation) it just doesn't sit right with me and makes me feel all squicky and wrong when I see it.

However, regardless of that, I don't agree with the ban, that type of art, much like any of the other extreme fetishes kept a small ring of artists and watchers happily amused and rarely if ever got into the main sites perspective.

So yeah, sorry that it got banned.

Now, on the theme of french art surely a revolution of some sort? :P

Technically it also contains the theme and subject of a pipe and child, there fore still has the qualities of giving humans the perceived thought of seeing a pipe and a child. So, If a person is seeing a picture of child porn, they are seeing child porn.

Elementary deductions my dear.

OVER ANALYZING

...Man am I slow...
As I said, It's elementary. I just used big sentences to explain it.

Well, actually... these are bits of light emitting from my laptop.

Ah, yes. I love "Ceci n'est pas une pipe."
A very appropriate piece.

But it IS a viable legal defense.

fuck yeah, I knew somebody would do that one day

I'm not personally into cub stuff, but in the style of Voltaire, I'll defend others' rights to it. Thanks for finally giving me the concise, polite version of "It's just drawn porn, if you don't like it don't be a dumbass and look at stuff you don't like."

This is 12 years old.

I could have sworn it was 18!