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

Main Site Fetish: Yes or no. Mandatory defining Submission.

So, in a post I made in the discussion board about tagging. (Didn't post it here as it is already a suggestion)
Source: "So, question.. Why advertise NSFW work under general audience?"
It was more of a Discussion piece than an active query.

I see people like myself who find it hard to peruse art while many Technically clean fetishes get plastered on general for all to see.
"What can you do? - I thought; it's Technically clean."
So I kept thinking about it.

More and more I thought of how we could solve this, and in a more timely fashion then trying to implement a tagging system. which could be a lot harder.
Now while this Suggestion wouldn't effect already posted art, new art added to the site could really gain from this system.

Simply add, A Mandatory check box with the selection:
Is this a fetish and (or) meant to cause arousal?
-Yes
-No

Now Of course this isn't perfect. Really, I mean one can argue that a soiled diaper is just ascetically pleasing and not a factor of arousal. But If added, most artists being forced to choose one or the other may actually give it more attention. It would also be a bit broader for more coverage. As some would see a bulge that could crush a small orphanage as General, but would cause arousal.

Adding that - New accounts have a setting that automatically hides "Questionable" art added right next to the SFW switch.
While not as good as a full on Tagging system - Definitely would help the ventilation of more Mature works that could be argued should still be in General. (Even if I personally do not agree)

Not sure How Viable this is, but I would love if something like this was added to start making the site more Audience viable therefor increasing revenue to the site. As well as making it better to browse if you have particular interests.

EDIT: Grammar.
 
Last edited:

quoting_mungo

Well-Known Member
I’m generally opposed to this as presented for one simple reason: it invites harassment of artists. What if someone draws a paw shot that they just intend as an anatomical study, but which shares many features of paw/foot fetish art? They’d likely get inundated with comments demanding they mark it as fetish material.

If a rule of this nature were to be implemented, for that reason, it should only apply to exaggerated features. While that leaves a gray area around the edges, it’s a lot less so than just saying “fetish art,” IMO.
 
I’m generally opposed to this as presented for one simple reason: it invites harassment of artists. What if someone draws a paw shot that they just intend as an anatomical study, but which shares many features of paw/foot fetish art? They’d likely get inundated with comments demanding they mark it as fetish material.

If a rule of this nature were to be implemented, for that reason, it should only apply to exaggerated features. While that leaves a gray area around the edges, it’s a lot less so than just saying “fetish art,” IMO.

I don't know how grey of a grey area that of what you speak is.
Really, I believe most people could see the difference of Anatomy and exaggeration.
And I don't believe people will be attacked as much as you say either; But of course it would need to be enacted to really know one way or the other. But most people do not even correct the Maturity ratings in comments, So I do not see this becoming as big as an issue.

I mean, even Pregnancy work could be in this. But many can obviously tell one from the other.
One obviously overemphasizes features while the other focuses on the subject as a whole.
Same as with obese characters. While I suck at drawing them I have a wonderful friend who draws them very well.
But her work is in no way able to be confused to Inflation, or the Obesity fetish.

Yes, saying just "Fetish" would be way too broad. That is why I spoke in Legality terminology.
""Is this a fetish and (or) meant to cause arousal?""
While it isn't perfect and I can already think of a better way of writing it. It definitely serves its purpose.
But yes, maybe more along the lines of.
"Is this meant to be Fetish work, and (or) Cause arousal"

However I still am not able to see how artists could be bullied by this, probably due to my own practically positive experience with people on FA. However I do not wish to gloss over your concern.
Cause it is a valid one. Which I'd say the creators of FA are a lot smart then myself and I am sure they could implement it in a balanced way. But if not, and what you fear comes to pass. Thankfully Blocking is a feature.
Cause you don't need toxic people like that in your life anyhow!
 
Top