Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile FurAffinity Previous Previous Next Next
Pedophilia on FA - The art of Thornwolf — LiveJournal
Pedophilia on FA
Ok so I've been hearing buzz about this from various places that FA allows drawings of a pedophilic nature on their site. Having run into quite a few of those myself I have to ask, "WTF FA?"

Now I really really really like this site, a lot, but why on earth would they allow something like that? Its more than just "its not my bag", its really, well, wrong. And yeah I know the fandom is full of sick twisted shit, but this is a bit too much for me.

I looked at the TOS and they say that while "artistic" depictions of children in sexual situations are not illegal by US law since no /real/ child was harmed,

"What we do NOT allow:

Depictions of sexually immature characters in any sexual situation are not permitted on Fur Affinity

We define 'sexually immature' as:
Clearly underdeveloped sexual characteristics for the species being represented, either by comparison to other characters in the depiction, or other 'well known' characters. This definition has a 'narrow focus', meaning we will accept any reasonable explanation to exclude a character from this definition.

And 'sexual situation' as:
Character is portraying any kind of sexual behaviour. Character is being protrayed in a provacative manner, such as their sexual characteristics being presented to the viewer, or any object in the drawing. Any other character in the drawing is displaying sexual behaviour, such as erections or sexual actions. This definition has a 'wide focus', meaning we will accept any reasonable explanation to include a situation in this definition."

Also I should note that according to the FA TOS, parts of this (namely the definition of what is "sexually immature") were taken from the VCL rules. And before anyone else says it, no I'm not saying FA is VCL, I'm just saying that if they're going to use their rules why won't they take the time to enforce them like they do?

So I ask, why oh why, if these rules are in place, are galleries like this one (nsfw!!) still in existance?

It makes me wonder if people complain about this stuff, will it get removed? Has anyone even /attempted/? Still uploads like this have been pretty prevalent lately. I encourage folks that if you see something that violates the TOS, say something.

Still though, it irks me that things like this are even /somewhat/ allowed. To the best of my recollection I remember a couple artists I know who have had pics removed from the VCL just because the character involved looked "child like" even though it wasn't, but I'd prefer to err on the side of caution than to let a bunch of this kinda stuff on there.

Dunno. Its all kinda disappointing.
40 comments or Leave a comment
drake_anaya From: drake_anaya Date: October 31st, 2006 05:23 pm (UTC) (Link)
The ToS is currently under extensive review/rewrite (I'm friends with one of the people involved), though I don't know how soon the updated version will be available.

As it is, the administration is quite flakey and only enforces the policy when they feel like it - most of the time if "pedo art" comes down, it's because the artist themselves doesn't want to be harassed. Warner Kids porn? A-ok. Lisa Simpson porn? Gets pulled (...precedented fact).

Usually when someone reports this kind of art they call it "child porn" and it ends up they debate semantics ("it's not child porn, there's no actual children involved!") rather than actual policy.
thornwolf From: thornwolf Date: October 31st, 2006 05:28 pm (UTC) (Link)
See thats what I don't get. As Likeshine said on one journal entry regarding this, on the show they call them "puppy children".

I also stumbled onto a pic containing porn of a certain Nickelodeon character with 3 cats who was human and doing things that I think would classify as child porn, but yet that was allowed. I understand people aren't hovering the recents nor do I expect them to really but still, FA is not DA huge, stuff like that is kinda hard to miss =/
From: ex_soryane Date: October 31st, 2006 05:29 pm (UTC) (Link)
just got to agree on all you said... pretty disturbed myself :/
even if no "real" children are involved it sickens me ... having a kid... this kind of stuff makes me afraid of the world for her... cause even if it's not real it's like encouraging it ... and that just isnt right *sigh*
thornwolf From: thornwolf Date: October 31st, 2006 05:45 pm (UTC) (Link)
Yeeeeah having in recent times lived right next to the young girl in Scripps Ranch, CA, Danielle Van Dam, who got kidnapped, raped and murdered, and then went to school right next to where the young Samantha Runion's body was found, I have to say pedophilia scares me a /lot/ and I'm a bit sensitive to anything remotely indicating it =/
evol From: evol Date: October 31st, 2006 05:30 pm (UTC) (Link)
I've been speaking out against it and reporting such galleries and submissions for a while on the TOS Violations Forum, but they always figure out some way to allow it. I like FA for the gallery and community options, but if stuff like this continues I will leave in a heartbeat.

I wish there was just a good place to upload my porn behind a membership gallery without having to see all this disgusting shit, or how the moderators try to keep it on their site.
thornwolf From: thornwolf Date: October 31st, 2006 05:33 pm (UTC) (Link)
as far as I'm concerned the devil can play his own advocate but I figured I'd say I can imagine what they're trying to pull what with allowing every fetish under the sun, WHY NOT child porn.

Difference is, most of the fetishes already allowed *vore..inflation* are not physically feasable nor are they illegal. Child porn, even drawn, is much too borderline IMO, I don't know why it should even be a question.

I really liked FA because of the community, the ways the galleries are set up etc. I also liked the fact that it had filters but I keep hearing stuff about them not working? And i haven't tried to log out and see the gallery I just posted, what about that stuff? If they don't rate their own stuff right how are we able to filter it out? =/
martes From: martes Date: October 31st, 2006 05:38 pm (UTC) (Link)
I haven't noticed as much 'cub' pron on FA as a couple of other sites I've seen, but that may be just because I skip over anything that looks questionable. I've actally seen a bunch more of those disgusting hypertrophic / inflation/ obese pictures on FA than cub art, but as I said, I just skip over anything that looks exceptionally nasty.

Because there are other venues for that stuff (Cub Central, the FChan sites)I wouldn't have a problem if they banned any and all art with underaged characters.

I wonder if those stings they keep showing on Dateline NBC where they bust people trying to meeet underage girls and boys over the internet could ever try targeting some of these people. That would be really funny.
die_monster From: die_monster Date: October 31st, 2006 05:52 pm (UTC) (Link)
Ok, yeah, that is pretty icky. i'll look around on FA for a "report TOS abuse" feature when I get home :C Man, wtf is wrong with people.
likeshine From: likeshine Date: October 31st, 2006 07:00 pm (UTC) (Link)

the animaniacs porn disgusts me.
shockwave77598 From: shockwave77598 Date: October 31st, 2006 07:05 pm (UTC) (Link)
For all I detest child porn, I have to side with the Danes on this one.

"It's just a cartoon - lines of ink on a paper. Prove that we drew the prophet Muhamannd, or anybody living or dead. You can't, can you?"

Sick? Probably. Bannable? Unless someone can prove the age of the characters, I don't think so. How old are the characters in the drawings and what evidence is there of that? What, all flatchested females are underaged by definition all of a sudden?

Not defending them at all, just noting how slippery a slope it can become. It's a cartoon; nasty as it may be it's still just a drawing. If there's disgusting stuff over there then don't go over there.
martes From: martes Date: October 31st, 2006 08:06 pm (UTC) (Link)
If it's a private art board the admins can ban whatever they want. For example, if they want to ban any artwork using the color orange they can.

I don't think people should be arrested for doing work like that, as reprehensible as it is. On the same token, I wouldn't let them within a mile of any RL kids. I also include the furry artists who draw 'innocent' pictures of children, because they're usually anything but. My alarm bells always go off when I see artwork of kids by adult, single men with no children of their own. That just ain't right.
altonwings From: altonwings Date: October 31st, 2006 07:15 pm (UTC) (Link)
People love to say 'Oh, well it's just a drawing', but I believe it still incites people to look at children sexually. It's wrong. There is no middle ground, and this is not done with artistic intent in my opinion.

Besides, isn't there enough regular porn of every bizarre shade of pale for people to peruse? Can't people just put the brakes on and say "You know what, kids are not sexy?" Just once I would love to see this fandom actually say that something goes to far. Really, just once.
nambroth From: nambroth Date: October 31st, 2006 07:32 pm (UTC) (Link)
alexf0x From: alexf0x Date: October 31st, 2006 07:21 pm (UTC) (Link)
*looks at the said FA gallery* WTF!?! Sh*t! F**k! What’s wrong with people dammit! *mind shatters, and leaves sharpish*

I thought that FA was becoming something of a major online gallery for furry Artwork, and with the crap that fandoms got in the past (post sex 2K and CSI) you would think that FA would crack down on this kind of thing pronto.

I am off now to scrub my mind clean with some industrial strengh bleach.
stokerbramwell From: stokerbramwell Date: October 31st, 2006 11:15 pm (UTC) (Link)
You think 8Horns is bad, you should see the work of BBMF or whatever he's called sometime.
shinigamigirl From: shinigamigirl Date: October 31st, 2006 11:33 pm (UTC) (Link)
Holy shit, animaniacs porn. So wronnng. I wonder what the hell makes them keep such stuff around..
From: youbettergo Date: November 1st, 2006 12:43 am (UTC) (Link)
Apparently somebody wants it enough to keep it online. DX
trufflehog From: trufflehog Date: November 1st, 2006 04:20 am (UTC) (Link)
is it really sad that scrolling past stuff like this on the recent uploads page doesn't even phase me anymore? well, it didn't, until i saw a certain image involving bambi, flower, and thumper...

oh. my brain just shut down.

what worries me more is if WB did get a hold of something like that. would that be putting every other user in danger? yeesh...
alexf0x From: alexf0x Date: November 1st, 2006 07:01 am (UTC) (Link)
Ture just said about that in another post, belive me it will only take one WB executive to spot this for the lawyer army to start marching to FA's door.

As it was VCL got in trouble a few years back (to the point that they banned fan art of any sort), after some of the folks at Disney saw the fan art (just genral stuff if I remmber) on the site.
suule From: suule Date: November 3rd, 2006 12:03 am (UTC) (Link)
I can't count the times I tried talking Dragoneer into banning it completely, the times I tried bringing up attention of the admins to it... nor the times I've ranted in my LJ about FA disposing of the cub porn.

If you follow the "Cub porn is alright" logic, soon we'll see shota, loli and other stuff on FA, cause technically speaking... it's just a picture, right? RIGHT? WRONG! I believe in artists' responsiblity of what they draw... Racial hatery? Propaganda bullshit? If you try to tell me "it's just a drawing", try telling that to millions of people that are blinded by it.

FurAffinity is getting a LOT of bad flak about cub art, but D doesn't seem to notice that. 'Cub lovers' can go to fchan, lulz.net or cubcentral.org which are just DRIPPING with delicious pedophilia.

What makes the matters worse is that few of the admins... like Damaratus or Uncia2000, like cub art and are making life miserable to anyone that try to report it.

Say "Ban cub art" on forums and you'll get "HATER OF FREEDOM" branded on your arm by some of the more vocal forum-goers. The new TOS team featuring some people from the "Freedom of Expression" camp doesn't bode too well. And unless Thaily and few other sane-minded individuals can fix the ToS up, FurAffinity will turn into another cub porn-ridden site.
thornwolf From: thornwolf Date: November 3rd, 2006 12:13 am (UTC) (Link)
The thing is I don't know how many admins there are, or who they are, but I know if there's as many as I've counted so far of COURSE there's going to be differing opinions across the board and I'm not expecting anything to get done about this.

Now, I like Dragoneer. I don't know him all /that/ well but so far I thought he was cool, but he told me on someone's LJ that he /hates/ the pedo art and it makes him sick, but when I see the same person hating it going around and thwarting plans to have a blatantly pedo art pic removed and saying "woah hey wait a minute lets see if we can get this to stay" then I really have to wonder about motives here.

Is there a fear of alienating artists into leaving the site? Because that's goibng to happen no matter what. The fact that this wasn't disallowed to begin with has opened up all sorts of room for squabbling.

40 comments or Leave a comment