# Is teen R18 content permitted?



## KippLink (Dec 1, 2020)

Hi everyone!
Just to clarify are teen characters that are in R18 artwork permitted on this website?

As i am a big fan of the whole MMORPG and fantasy that i produce fan art which in times is R18, it is often that RPG characters in games can be quite small in size and i am struggling to bring the message i am making the artwork based on adult characters that are simply small :/


----------



## quoting_mungo (Dec 1, 2020)

Characters under 18 may not be shown in sexual content/nude with genitals showing. Small characters over 18, such as adult FFXIV lalafel, should in theory be okay but I totally see that it can be difficult to make it clear that they’re just a small race. If you feel like something you want to post may be interpreted wrong, try filing a ticket on mainsite under Questions About Site Policy and ask staff if the particular piece would be okay. If they say yes, try requesting that they make a note of it in your account history.


----------



## Deleted member 134556 (Dec 1, 2020)

Art depicting underaged characters in sexual, violent, or any other obviously mature scenarios, fictional or otherwise, is not permitted on Furaffinity.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Dec 1, 2020)

[Nexus] said:


> Art depicting underaged characters in sexual, violent, or any other obviously mature scenarios, fictional or otherwise, is not permitted on Furaffinity.


Violence is actually not listed in the AUP:


> 2.7 Content Involving Minors​Content featuring minors is prohibited when the minor is in the presence of sexual activity, sexual objects, or nudity, though exceptions may be made for non-sexual depictions of birth and breastfeeding. Presence is defined as being in the same scene, such as sharing a comic panel, contiguous image, reference sheet, or specific section of a story where characters are engaging each other.
> 
> Minors may not have detailed bulges or outlines of normal or hyper genitalia, clothed or otherwise. Minors may not have their pregnancies fetishized. Minors younger than 13 may not be depicted as pregnant. Minors are defined as real or fictional humanoids with a childlike body or younger than 18 years old, and any adolescent animals.


----------



## Deleted member 134556 (Dec 1, 2020)

quoting_mungo said:


> Violence is actually not listed in the AUP:


Ah, I was wrong about that one then. My mistake.


----------



## TrishaCat (Dec 1, 2020)

You could always just upload to other art sites like Pixiv


----------



## luffy (Dec 1, 2020)

Typically, if you draw fanart, you're allowed to make NSFW art of "underage" characters *as long as* you age them up.  This means physical body/facial changes, not childlike body with a "this is definitely 18!" description.  In the same vein, though, characters can appear to be 18 without having stated it.  This is common in a lot of anime as a lot of the characters are drawn, er... "promiscuously."  It's a very thin line and I compare content to the canon before I remove.


----------



## JuniperW (Dec 1, 2020)

TrishaCat said:


> You could always just upload to other art sites like Pixiv


...or just not upload it anywhere at all. That kind of art is inherently harmful.


----------



## TrishaCat (Dec 1, 2020)

JuniperW said:


> ...or just not upload it anywhere at all. That kind of art is inherently harmful.


Oops! Well it looks like my collection of ecchi anime blurays are causing the world harm
Thanks for informing me, i'll be sure to email all my favorite dvd and manga publishers to let them know that they're publishing harmful stuff


----------



## JuniperW (Dec 1, 2020)

TrishaCat said:


> Oops! Well it looks like my collection of ecchi anime blurays are causing the world harm
> Thanks for informing me, i'll be sure to email all my favorite dvd and manga publishers to let them know that they're publishing harmful stuff


Nah, you're good, so long as none of those anime involve kids, nor those "5000 year old goddess in a child's body" kind of characters. 
(Seriously though, it's a rampant problem in any kind of media, not just online art circles.)


----------



## KippLink (Dec 1, 2020)

Ok thanks for the info as initially i thought only cub content is not permitted and characters that are teen we're fine. But as discovered this renders the website useless to me whilst i do not produce cub i do produce characters that are impossible to age up simply because i try to stick to original appearance such as Undertale characters for example. I think on this note i will have to nuke my gallery and stick to other websites.


----------



## TrishaCat (Dec 1, 2020)

AeroTail said:


> Ok thanks for the info as initially i thought only cub content is not permitted and characters that are teen we're fine. But as discovered this renders the website useless to me whilst i do not produce cub i do produce characters that are impossible to age up simply because i try to stick to original appearance such as Undertale characters for example. I think on this note i will have to nuke my gallery and stick to other websites.


Use Pixiv! Pixiv doesn't really restrict any art; its not perfect as you have to censor genitalia, but a very teeny tiny black line is enough to suffice there.
There's also an art site in the making called Fanexus that will let users upload any kind of art, so you may consider waiting for that as well.


----------



## Balskarr (Dec 1, 2020)

Damn... Why does this forum make me have to ask "Why don't we just _not_ sexualise minors?" so damn often?


----------



## quoting_mungo (Dec 1, 2020)

TrishaCat said:


> There's also an art site in the making called Fanexus that will let users upload any kind of art, so you may consider waiting for that as well.


For all that I’m excited for Fanexus, it _is_ worth noting that development is kinda running on Valve time at the moment. I don’t think any new concrete timeline has been posted after they ran well over their initial estimates for the start of beta.

There’s official information about the project in this thread:

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1300075592272867329
But yeah; bottom line still is “post where it’s welcome and you feel comfortable,” regardless of where that is. I just figure the time aspect is worth noting before hitching your plans entirely to it.


----------



## TrishaCat (Dec 1, 2020)

quoting_mungo said:


> For all that I’m excited for Fanexus, it _is_ worth noting that development is kinda running on Valve time at the moment. I don’t think any new concrete timeline has been posted after they ran well over their initial estimates for the start of beta.
> 
> There’s official information about the project in this thread:
> 
> ...


fair 
I've been waiting for the site for about a year now, so you're right lol. Who knows when its coming.


----------



## KippLink (Dec 1, 2020)

TrishaCat said:


> Use Pixiv! Pixiv doesn't really restrict any art; its not perfect as you have to censor genitalia, but a very teeny tiny black line is enough to suffice there.
> There's also an art site in the making called Fanexus that will let users upload any kind of art, so you may consider waiting for that as well.


Hiya! Thank you for the suggestion i am really interested in that Fanexus project i really hope they finish it.


----------



## Croctorwho (Dec 7, 2020)

luffy said:


> Typically, if you draw fanart, you're allowed to make NSFW art of "underage" characters *as long as* you age them up.  This means physical body/facial changes, not childlike body with a "this is definitely 18!" description.  In the same vein, though, characters can appear to be 18 without having stated it.  This is common in a lot of anime as a lot of the characters are drawn, er... "promiscuously."  It's a very thin line and I compare content to the canon before I remove.


How is that ok. People get to skirt the no cub rule just by drawing them a little older/mature looking?


----------



## fawlkes (Dec 7, 2020)

It's a curious thing to see this discussion. And whilst not entirely 'cub' so to speak, I have a pony that I use quite often. Her name is Lemon Zest; she's a maid, and she's the ripe old age of sixteen. I don't feel guilt getting her into raunchy situations, because here in Scotland 16 is the legal age for sexual consent, and marriage without parental consent. Just interesting to note the lines here.


----------



## BayoDino (Dec 7, 2020)

fawlkes said:


> It's a curious thing to see this discussion. And whilst not entirely 'cub' so to speak, I have a pony that I use quite often. Her name is Lemon Zest; she's a maid, and she's the ripe old age of sixteen. I don't feel guilt getting her into raunchy situations, because here in Scotland 16 is the legal age for sexual consent, and marriage without parental consent. Just interesting to note the lines here.


Well I could draw teen characters in sexual arts because Here the legal age for sexual consent is +15, but however it is still +18 in USA, Furaffinity is located in USA, so you've to go with its rules.


----------



## Raever (Dec 7, 2020)

Just going to say that the OP was clearly asking about content relative to adult characters of small stature...



AeroTail said:


> i am struggling to bring the message i am making the artwork based on adult characters that are simply small



And not about teen and/or child relative things. 

I've noticed several members half read or skim things and then immediately begin spouting rules or their own opinions without knowing what the OP even wants to know about to begin with. It can be rather daunting- and rude.

I know I'm late to the party but, I've seen many artists draw NSFW content for characters of small stature, both OC's and Canonical Characters from other Media. A Moderator also stated that they look at media before making a judgement. So I'd say you're safe to post things. I'd recommend including tags though, just to be on the safer side!


----------



## Raever (Dec 7, 2020)

Croctorwho said:


> People get to skirt the no cub rule just by drawing them a little older/mature looking?



Well if you drew a child and aged them up to an adult (example; A pup named Scooby-Doo > Scooby-Doo) it wouldn't really be cub related would it? It'd be more like fantasizing about a different version of a character's design (ex. Markings, horns, etc), instead of a character's age.


----------



## luffy (Dec 7, 2020)

Croctorwho said:


> How is that ok. People get to skirt the no cub rule just by drawing them a little older/mature looking?


Yeah. But its not skirting because they are drawing them physically older to the point they no longer appear as children.


----------



## TheCynicalViet (Dec 7, 2020)

luffy said:


> But its not skirting because they are drawing them physically older to the point they no longer appear as children.


This is the very important distinction to make and really should be the pinned comment on this thread if such a thing was possible. If a person decides to create NSFW of a canonically minor character then it would behoove them to draw that character or characters in such a way that indicates physical (and also ideally mental) maturity.

Now, if anybody is so dead set on wanting to draw minors in compromising situations and intends to post it on this forum: 1) don't, and 2) post it on a site that allows such content (not here). Outside of NSFW or porn, you can experiment with this idea from an artistic or literary sense as long as you keep it classy and understand that you are trying to tell a story instead of creating spank material. Not to say that it's automatically gonna turn out good because, from my experience, if it's not on the level of Vladimir Nabokov's "Lolita" in original Russian text then it's most likely gonna turn out to be trash and barely veiled porn anyways.

Although, back when I was a mod for me and my friend's private forum, I used to be an asshole and invoke a bastardized version of "death of the author" where even though the artists would claim that their drawing was properly aged up (even if it was clearly an adult version of that character), I would still declare that the artwork featured minors and delete the post and give the user's profile an infraction. I'm just saying, Luffy. If the community makes enough noise EVEN IF the artists did everything right, and it will happen eventually, then this might be something to consider.


----------



## PinchRib (Jan 5, 2021)

TheCynicalViet said:


> This is the very important distinction to make and really should be the pinned comment on this thread if such a thing was possible. If a person decides to create NSFW of a canonically minor character then it would behoove them to draw that character or characters in such a way that indicates physical (and also ideally mental) maturity.
> 
> Now, if anybody is so dead set on wanting to draw minors in compromising situations and intends to post it on this forum: 1) don't, and 2) post it on a site that allows such content (not here). Outside of NSFW or porn, you can experiment with this idea from an artistic or literary sense as long as you keep it classy and understand that you are trying to tell a story instead of creating spank material. Not to say that it's automatically gonna turn out good because, from my experience, if it's not on the level of Vladimir Nabokov's "Lolita" in original Russian text then it's most likely gonna turn out to be trash and barely veiled porn anyways.
> 
> Although, back when I was a mod for me and my friend's private forum, I used to be an asshole and invoke a bastardized version of "death of the author" where even though the artists would claim that their drawing was properly aged up (even if it was clearly an adult version of that character), I would still declare that the artwork featured minors and delete the post and give the user's profile an infraction. I'm just saying, Luffy. If the community makes enough noise EVEN IF the artists did everything right, and it will happen eventually, then this might be something to consider.





Spoiler: off-topic reply to offtopic reply



verrry few nobakov fans (that i've encountered, we're getting real anecdotal here) actually know why lolita was published, or even written the way it was written.  all of nobakov's other works are perfectly functional explorations of prose and social engineering that don't sexualize any minors.

but lolita was written specifically to troll publishing house censorship, in a time when political censorship was especially rampant under the guise that censorship in general was 'to protect the public' from actual gross content, like sexualizing minors or harmfully objectifying women (also problems in the era). and there nobakov went a wrote an entire book that did just that, but used very specific wording that the censors couldn't claim any infraction against, *specifically to point out their hypocrisy* because the censorship was -never- about protecting any vulnerable castes it was always just for political control and oppression of ideas that ran counter to, well, the power structures of the time.

so not even lolita is about lolita, it was just a well-established author using his power and influence to try and help his country. political oppression often, if not always, uses actual social problems as facades under which to run their campaigns; so if a campaign for, say, a free-range ability to arrest anyone for any reason or even no reason at all is marketed as counter-terrorism, what it's actually doing is using peoples' fears of terrorism to enact a police state.

same, w/ censorship in a legal arena. even if we ever could make publication of sexualization of minors in cartoon media illegal, protecting real life victims of CP would only be the 'scare', not the actual cause or the actual problem getting solved, and then things would happen, like, if the creators of rick and morty ever got into any political arenas they'd be vulnerable to arrest and punishment since morty is technically a child and a few of those episodes are spicy. the showrunners for rick and morty are quite influential, and i don't know their politics but they don't deserve a vulnerability to jailtime just for making gross media; ESPECIALLY when gross media is made by artists all over the political spectrum, and not even always for the shock factor or laughs.

that's nothing to do with this website; i'm relieved all the cubporn got the takedown, and that's actually a big reason i returned, just as like my personal taste and boundary-setting and all that.  even a user who is above age and wasn't abused, shouldn't have to sift through any content that so deeply disturbs them, and FA has a sort of brand to maintain so users can know what they're signing up for when joining.  it's just good sense.



on topic: as someone with a small body type who draws small body porn because uhh it me, same anxiety.

i had to get real wise real quick when i dated outside of certain circles, too, because there are legit -censored- who didn't want to see me as a person and only wanted to sexualize my small features. lots of red flags in their behavior, don't worry -- you're not a creep for liking small body archetype and the line is actually pretty clear between kinkster and predator in terms of behavior / entitlement / delusion et al.  like the fact that you're worried is first clue that you're fine.

if you're very worried, you can read up on visual language in photography -- the same holds true for drawing; what pose are you giving the small bodied character, do they get agency, is the image 'focusing' on which detail et c. 

i think that's what is meant when it's said that admins can just look at the picture and know the difference, so, if you want to know the difference, have some read-up on the displaying agency of subjects in photography, fashion or advertising or even just regular porn.  might help!


----------

