• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

A Thank-You For a Fair Decision

Status
Not open for further replies.

Summercat

Former Motterator
WolfeByte said:
werewolfzombies said:
The definition of a Pedophilia is not just a person who acts, its also person who has fantasies or sexual urges towards children. Just because they are not real characters doesn’t mean the behavior should be tolerated

"Hey you! I saw that thought! You're under arrest!"

Maybe on the sci-fi channel, bud, but in the real world people actually have to act on things before it's a crime.

I know, I know, it's so unjust, people should be persecuted for impure thoughts, but a good mind reader is so hard to find these days. :roll:

Some Christians believe that meerly the thought of doing a sin is the same as doing it.

Thought /= Deed.
 
Summercat said:
WolfeByte said:
werewolfzombies said:
The definition of a Pedophilia is not just a person who acts, its also person who has fantasies or sexual urges towards children. Just because they are not real characters doesn’t mean the behavior should be tolerated

"Hey you!  I saw that thought!  You're under arrest!"

Maybe on the sci-fi channel, bud, but in the real world people actually have to act on things before it's a crime.  

I know, I know, it's so unjust, people should be persecuted for impure thoughts, but a good mind reader is so hard to find these days.  :roll:

Some Christians believe that meerly the thought of doing a sin is the same as doing it.

Thought /= Deed.
Well it's a good thing we're not all Christians then.

Your intent is not as important as the act, though intent or thought is still important. Action is MORE important because it's the ONLY thing other people can respond to...unless you happen to be a mind reader...or a ficticious character.
 

Arshes Nei

Masticates in Public
werewolfzombies said:
The definition of a Pedophilia is not just a person who acts, its also person who has fantasies or sexual urges towards children. Just because they are not real characters doesn’t mean the behavior should be tolerated

Towards real children. Some people may translate an image of manga or shota as a real human child. No denial, are they a pedophile, yes.

Some people may actually just like the art style. Example manga proportions of big eyes and a small mouth actually scare the fuck out of me in a realistic idea, even if translated to make it look less freaky. However, I find it very attractive as a style.

Some people may be actually turned off by real children's bodies. Some are. That's the thing, everyone is assuming everyone who does, draws it or what not is.

See it's easy to make the illustrated child body = wanting real body jump, but quite honestly it's actually NOT that simple when it comes to illustrations. Some people may find that illustration or "World" their comfort zone because they cannot deal or find disgust with real human bodies, child, adult or what ever.

So there's probably quite a few people that may probably get sexually aroused by illustrations or fantasized version of whatever because it makes them feel more comfortable that way for release. See and that is a bizarre fetish too, but I can't exactly class it as pedophilia. Call them crazy or weird, sure, can't deny that, but a pedophile, not unless they are saying they're sexually attracted to a real child's body.

Some admitted they did, because of the age play thing. However, if they did molest a kid, then get them the fuck in jail. Doesn't matter to me.

That's why I still stand by the argument, what you draw is not equated to what you think that fetish is. Fantasy is not equal to reality. And there are many reasons for that.
 

Honeymane

Member
Arshes Nei said:
werewolfzombies said:
The definition of a Pedophilia is not just a person who acts, its also person who has fantasies or sexual urges towards children. Just because they are not real characters doesn’t mean the behavior should be tolerated

Towards real children. Some people may translate an image of manga or shota as a real human child. No denial, are they a pedophile, yes.

[...]

That's why I still stand by the argument, what you draw is not equated to what you think that fetish is. Fantasy is not equal to reality. And there are many reasons for that.
I have a question for you, if, in 50 years, we have 'holodeck' suits that can. infact, create anysort of 'fantasy' the user wants, and teh user creates a Holographic image of a child, and an adult having sex/ or they perform the act.

Techincaly speaking, the hologram is not a real person. so it's not 'Pedophila'. But, should the technoloy advance further, their is a good chance that reality and fiction will merge.

Just because an image is drawn, and posted on the internet, doesn't mean that the person behind it, is indeed a pedo. I'll agree with you there, but, because this is teh internet, it is impossible to prove that such art is indeed the artistic interpation of an event, thus you are covered on all 'bases'.

But I have a question for you; Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety act had in a section related to a Legal term know has "Ex Post Facto Laws'. In which, the Attorney General has the power to apply the law retroactivily, or, in plain english, to allow the Act to crimalize actions that are techinically legal at the time they where commited.

While I'm no legal expert, I'm sure the Court maybe able to make a case out anyform of Pedophilla, including 'art'.

And like I said, it is impossible to prove that A) the people who post Cub art aare not using it as an outlet for their sexual fetish, and B) that children are not being harmed.
 

Arshes Nei

Masticates in Public
Why are we playing Star Trek for this argument?

We're talking about now. Putting up a ridiculous hypothesis like this...I actually like dealing with reality here.

BTW did you know that many Pedophiles are also Star Trek fans? I guess we should ban Star Trek.

It's also impossible for you for 1. To prove that the person is using it for a sexual fetish. 2. That actual children are involved.

But I'll be very fair, because people need to figure some things out.
In order to make the fantasy more real, they go for something more realistic. The more realistic your image is of an actual child the better they get off. The more abstract it is the harder it is to get off. People who get off on feet, the feet must look a certain way. The artwork must also get as close to it as possible.

Removing artwork does not remove REAL pedophiles from the site. It just makes you feel better, and I'm sorry feel good reactions, do not solve problems, until little Billy on this site gets raped because parents didn't take any responsibility on watching their child. Then you will express moral outrage that FA doesn't watch all its users.

I bet in fact, you probably encountered on the net some guy who was a real pedophile but you felt, it wasn't your responsibility, or problem...then sometimes it's too late. See, I on the other hand don't put up with that. But if you're scared of art, you're really not facing the REAL problem.

Here's also a statistic for you

About 95% of victims know their perpetrators.
Source: CCPCA, 1992.

It is estimated that approximately 71% of child sex offenders are under 35 and knew the victim at least casually. About 80% of these individuals fall within normal intelligence ranges; 59% gain sexual access to their victims through, seduction or enticement.
Source: Burgess & Groth, 1984.



Also Just for both sides, if you want to know about the reality of crimes here is a good site.

http://www.prevent-abuse-now.com/stats.htm

One significant thing to note especially since I mentioned this earlier and people are so focused about ADULTS.

40% of offenders who victimized children under age 6 were juveniles (under age 18 ).
 

Honeymane

Member
Arshes Nei said:
Why are we playing Star Trek for this argument?

We're talking about now. Putting up a ridiculous hypothesis like this...I actually like dealing with reality here.

I was creating a comperaison, both holograms and digial images are 'not real' but....

It's also impossible for you for 1. To prove that the person is using it for a sexual fetish.

I shouldn't have to; if you didn't like it, why create it in the first place?

About 95% of victims know their perpetrators.
Source: CCPCA, 1992.

It is estimated that approximately 71% of child sex offenders are under 35 and knew the victim at least casually. About 80% of these individuals fall within normal intelligence ranges; 59% gain sexual access to their victims through, seduction or enticement.
Source: Burgess & Groth, 1984.
what's your point?
 

Arshes Nei

Masticates in Public
Meaning you're looking for the wrong boogeyman to blame.

Honeymane said:
I shouldn't have to; if you didn't like it, why create it in the first place?

o/~ The CIRCLE OF LIFEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE o/~

http://www.furaffinityforums.net/showthread.php?tid=4264&pid=64079#pid64079

Child predators groom their victims but without proper parental guidance they'll get ensnared and no amount of banning artwork will stop that.
 

Dragonrider1227

New Member
lonewolf23k said:
Yeah, thank you for accepting Cub Porn...

...And thus causing the big name furry artists like Greg Panovich, Cybercat, Andrew Dickman, StickDevil, J3T and some others to pack their bags and leave..

...I hope you cubfuckers will be happy.  :x

Hey, if they can't accept the idea of a website that's actually open to multiple forms of art, that's they're problem. They want an art site corrupted by censorship, they can go to Deviantart.
Theses people have to figure out that when you join an art group, you're going to find forms of art that may make you uncomfortable, you may not want to look at, and may believe that in some ways is morally wrong. Even if it is, that's purely opinion and no one should be told "YOU CAN'T DRAW THIS! I THINK IT'S IMMORAL!" I hate seeing pictures of my favorite cartoon characters being buchtured just because they don't like the character, but they have the right to draw that and the right to show it to he people they think will like it. Furaffinity shouldn't have to make new rules just because someone popular thinks they should be so. What? You want FA to be a bunch of buttkissers now?

PS. A person that draws cub-porn doesn't make them a cubfucker. Does a person that draws a naked fox furry make them a fox fucker?
 

N3X15

Member
lonewolf23k said:
Yeah, thank you for accepting Cub Porn...

...And thus causing the big name furry artists like Greg Panovich, Cybercat, Andrew Dickman, StickDevil, J3T and some others to pack their bags and leave..

...I hope you cubfuckers will be happy. :x

Old-1950sHeadache.jpg


Who cares if people leave? I sure as hell don't. 30,000 people on this site, a lot of them are great artists, and a lot have not left.

And, as stressed, drawing cub stuff doesn't make one a pedo/cubfucker. I could draw a cub right now getting buttlove from a llama just to be funny. Does that make me a pedo or a cubfucker? No. Stop making assumptions please.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top