Welcome to Inkbunny...

To view member-only content, create an account. ( Hide )

« older newer »

InfinityDoom's Gallery (394)

Not A Loophole!

Medium (920px wide max)

Wide - use max window width - scroll to see page ⇅

Fit all of image in window

set default image size: small | medium | wide

Download (new tab)

by InfinityDoom

Gallery

This is a protest image. I’m posting it here on inkbunny only so I can spread the asset more. And because I know many of you here have abandoned your FA accounts (understandably) but would be willing to resurrect them one more time to support something like this.

HOWEVER

Let’s be respectful to Inkbunny and keep the protest purely on FurAffinity. I do however. Encourage you to spread the image and accompanying text across your pokemon/digimon/and general furry discords and telegrams and encourage others to join in. No need to link this page, or credit/mention me at all.

Keywords

pokemon 176,519, digimon 24,985, lucario 11,317, guilmon 2,501, furaffinity 2,413, fa 249, protest 123, policy 10, policy change 1

Details

Type: Picture/Pinup

Published: 11 months, 3 weeks ago

Rating: General

MD5 Hash for Page 1... Show Find Identical Posts [?]

Stats

2,517 views

108 favorites

26 comments

BBCode Tags Show [?]

26 Comments on this Submission

Leave a Comment...

Dubbie18

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

Best artist of the world you r the greatest porn

ratsrepuososim

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

@ Dubbie18

Ehhhh... I would say best at world building but yknow how that went...

MystBunny

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

Funny thing is, Guilmon and Renemon are officially cubs, but I bet they won't fall under scrutiny in the least while Gatomon who is officially adult will.

MviluUatusun

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

@ MystBunny

You're probably right because the policy says "body proportions" will be the determining factor, not actual age.

Leezpunk

1 month, 3 weeks ago

link

@ MystBunny

I was recently reminded how in the first episode of season 2 Gatomon actually made a joke about punching a time clock while in forced labor/work for the evil Digimon Emperor.

Reizinho

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

Very well, I abandoned FA long ago. But I can share this around on Discord, yes.
https://inkbunny.net/j/482942-Reizinho-regarding-fur-af...
Wrote some considerations on it as well.

IBp

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

I feel this misses the target unfortunately.

What you're dealing with actually is due to the ban on "minor content" in general.
Artists aren't creating life, they're lines and colors on a screen. I know that argument is probably heard a lot but not many people think about what it means fully.

That means that they don't have feelings. They aren't capable of harm or being harmed. Hell, they don't even have to be euclidean.
It's colors that form an illusion to our eyes. It's literally entirely subjective. Trying to find morality in that is what lead us down this path.

The "1000 year old vampire" trope is frustrating to them because it points out the flaw in their logic. Children are protected from sex because of the inherent mental advantage over them an adult has, the huge ramifications on their sexuality, and the mental damage of being taken advantage of to such an extreme extent.

The harm of sex with children is nearly entirely psychological, otherwise it wouldn't be so disgusting.
If an adult could revert their body to that of a child, but keep their psychology and brain chemistry intact, they would actually be moral to have sex with.

If we are going to assign morality to art based on depictions of things that cause psychological damage, to creatures or people who are simply cartoons, illusions, and cannot experience psychological damage because they are just a collection of colors, the possibilities of censorship are ENDLESS with this claim. As it could be said about literally anything. Just like we're seeing right now.
This is without even considering the context of fiction in general not having to abide by the laws of the real world. Even if we were to judge the "morality" of drawings. What if someone created a fictional story where sex with cubs would cure cancer and prevent mental illness in adulthood? Where sexual development and brain chemistry fully develops nearly instantly after birth? Would depictions of this still be "immoral" by the rules outlined within the fiction? THIS is the silly territory we get into when we start thinking like this.

Think of it like this, cub porn is basically roleplay. It's an adult expressing something to other adults. It doesn't matter what that thing is if all the adults partaking consent.

All of this means that banning any type of artwork is a foot in the door to what we're seeing at furaffinity right now. It was "okay" when cub was banned, but then when it extended to fictional characters MORE people enjoy THEN it became a problem. That problem cannot be avoided unless you dismiss the premise of ANY art being "acceptable" or "unacceptable" entirely. Even if this specific policy gets beaten this will literally never end until that idea leaves the fandom's brains.

With all of this I'm trying to say even acknowledging them as trying to "protect" against "minor content" is sabotaging. The message should just be about how lewd art is adult expression no matter what.
The only minor protection we need is making sure underage people stay OUT of our spaces and are met with hostility to gatekeep them.

NecroBLAU24HG

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

@ IBp

I've been very frustrated with this policy change as being a tf artist that focuses heavily on Digimon and monsters in general I draw both SFW and NSFW of said fictional beasties.

The way you described the situation and your thoughts are strung together very well. Which I feel with time other furries tend to forget about roleplaying in such content, as you put it. Anyway what I wanted to responded with is that I agree heavily on this anticensorship approach for adult oriented artwork, especially since from what I've been seeing on Twitter and other leaks of the staff communication it mostly just seems like some bizarre crusade to silence even more artists. Along with the whole thing that this new addition to the policy also makes the site owner's work against it too which is the most baffling part to me.

If it was really for protecting minors they should have been more strict on people not applying the correct content filters so Mature and Adult art would never reach those eyes. Or simply age checking users to make sure they're of age. It feels more of an attack towards art overall and that this is just a nibble before they fully sink their fangs deeper into the community for the way they express themselves.

IBp

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

Edited 11 months, 3 weeks ago by Owner

@ NecroBLAU24HG

One of the worst things we've done is be casual about minors in the fandom.
Them going to cons among people wearing sex gear in the open.
Letting people have furry twitter accounts openly stating they're 14, talking about using adult spaces and not dogpiling them to get out and ask where their damn parents are.
THIS is where the "minor protection" focus should be. We don't even have to do any privacy violations like ID checks. Simply making adult spaces openly hostile to them as they properly SHOULD be should be enough for them to not even WANT to partake in the spaces or at least be too scared of the consequences.
They need to be treated like a child walking into a strip club. "What the HELL are you doing here? Let me talk to your parents."

Edit : You're also right about needing better content/tag enforcement. Inkbunny is probably the best with its multiple checks(Both need to match your birthdate THEN enable adult content manually) and blacklists but still could theoretically be a little better. It's just a problem of lack of resources at the moment I suppose.

VotP

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

@ IBp

FA has had nearly two decades to improve it's handling of things, if they were so concerned about harm to minors I'm baffled why, out of all the changes they could have made, they didn't just make the site 18+ outright. When you take a site that hosts pornography and openly say "you only need to be 13 to register, heehee" you kinda create a situation where minors and sexual content are in the same ecosystem.

IBp

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

@ VotP

I had totally forgotten that FA ISN'T 18+ which is BAFFLING.

VotP

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

@ IBp

What percentage of ad-viewing users do you think are under 18? I'd guess a lot.

ClaireHaschen

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

@ IBp

This, 100%

Nyrufa

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

@ IBp

Yeah, when talking about minor characters, the big issue that I've seen people argue about this generally comes down to the point of the child not being mentally developed enough, or emotionally mature enough to comprehend what is happening to them. So when you introduce the character trope of somebody having the body of a child, but the wisdom and experience of someone who's lived for hundreds, or even thousands of years, it becomes confusing as to why they might still have a problem with it.

If the problem is that they're not mentally qualified, and you proceed to remove that problem from the situation, then what is there to complain about?

neitsuke

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

@ Nyrufa

The argument they make is non nonsensical to begin with because fictional characters are not sentient nor living. There are laws protecting children because actual, real living children do not have the ability to consent to that stuff and people going after them is causing real and tangible harm
What those people do not understand is people who like underage looking characters do because they like characteristics linked to youth, not because the characters are underage themselves. It's the same with the furry fandom in general : They like the animal attributes/characteristics and has nothing to do with wanting to hump actual animals
Now that I think about it it's kind of ironic how they're fervently about anything remotely underage looking but are fine with feral looking porn, adult or not

Servas

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

@ IBp

Yeah, this is well-articulated

The way I always put it... The way the anti-types interact with fiction, it's treated as an illicit substance of which interacting will gradually corrupt you. It's based on a theory of normalization, wherein repeated exposure to something in fiction will make it feel more normal, and can thus cause people in real life to imitate and inflict harm on others. Thus, some art must be disallowed entirely.

Except that isn't, and has never been, how we interact with fiction. Fiction allows us to explore ideas, and concepts. We watch violence in movies and play violent games - but these tend to correspond to reductions in violent crime. In countries where porn is more freely available, sex crimes drop dramatically. The idea that fictional depiction of something - even when it is not condemned, and even when it is treated as glorious, as violence and porn so often are - will cause people to do things in real life is outright incorrect

The reality is that interacting with fiction is a skill. It can be trained. When the problematic and controversial is allowed to be depicted, people are more able to handle the ideas they are presented with. They think about it. Maybe an action hero killing the villains in an orgy of violence is very cool - but you come out of it with an acute awareness that shooting people kills them, and you think about that scene. You can compartmentalize that in a way that is productive and healthy to your mind. You get better at analyzing themes and art. You more fully understand what art is getting at, in all it's forms and natures. And you understand more fully how art is effects you, and what YOU hope to get out of it. And, so too, it encourages further creation, in all it's forms.

This manner of emboldening and appreciating fiction, you know? It allows us to explore ourselves; it allows us to explore our thoughts and present them, and it creatures a culture of art in which our open and free expression is allowed to thrive and make art for the sake of making art. That is something precious, and it is what the furry fandom has so often been built on. Moreover, it's what ALL fandom spaces, and much of the internet's golden age, has been built upon.

These restrictions on FA, and how it effects unfairly some art, I think is something that happens when that kind of open and enthusiastic expression is suddenly under threat. I think a lot of people have forgotten the importance of artistic expression, and how a presumption of allowing anything because art cannot be unethical. How that default has effected the many art movements which were enabled in so many fandom spaces, when this kind of innate respect for all expression was the default. And, how these were the very basis for so much of online culture and responsible for the explosion of online creativity in the 2000s.

When art is free, and open, everyone benefits. When art is treated as a substance to be controlled, everyone suffers. So, we have to protect art, in all it's forms... Even those we may well find distasteful, as the foundations which protect those also enable heights in the things we do appreciate

I hope, if anything, these events make people realize how important it is to protect the kinds of free expression which has allowed us all to develop so much

Nyrufa

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

Edited 11 months, 3 weeks ago by Owner

@ Servas

Yeah, and it's complete bull shit.

I've been playing excessively violent video games since the ancient days of the NES (the system that existed before Super Nintendo) and to this day I have never once gone on a homicidal killing spree. If anything, violence in video games gave me an outlet for all the pent up aggression I had been harboring, rather than being the source of it. Parents who blame their kids becoming psychopaths on video games just don't want to take responsibility and admit that they failed as a parent by neglecting their child until it was too late.

Likewise, I've been a fan of underage characters in the art community for more than half my life (like you said, I find them cute), and have never once made any attempt to assault an actual child. I understand the difference between a fictional character and a real person. Anyone who can't make that distinction has more deeply rooted problems than simply what kind of artwork they decide to look at.

VotP

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

Love the new update they just posted ends with them saying people who deleted were "too hasty" and, of course, "GIVE US MONEY PLZ".

NastyDonkey

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

Edited 11 months, 3 weeks ago by Owner

and yet Dragoneer's character is based on a guilmon yet people have been told guilmon is a child character therefor its not allowed on furaffinity....its so dumb...

for one Guilmon is a digital monster with no age, even if he has an age, he can be in rookie form for his entire life so he can be 80 years old and still look the same. the entire cub argument for rookie digimon dosnt work at all XD

hegyak

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

@ NastyDonkey

That is not the issue. The issue is, Guilmon can NOT be in NSFW Situations or participate in those Activities. But SWF Content is perfectly fine.

VotP

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

@ NastyDonkey

Tell furries on FA that because the "Rookie" level in Japanese is "Child-Level" that Renamon is a child. Watch them eat themselves alive.

Banjo2246

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

FA is so full of shit with their new rules. Its a fucking drawing. Its not real, it has no rights. And as long as nobody is actually going out and harming children then whats the big deal???

DrippingPanties

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

Guilmon is OK on FA despite literally a digimon that is child-like mentally but Gatomon a adult digimon is considered by FA to be a child. Don't forget that the fuhrer of FA is using a guilmon as his fursona so a lot of hypocrisy going on on that site

flagcatcher

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

Two communities... For now. This is simply a template to expand the ban to every character whose proportions are a certain way and whose age is vague or unspecified

Furtard101

11 months, 3 weeks ago

link

Did anyone else get their accounts deleted over this? I can't find any of the posts that had this uploaded by them