# Is cartoon bestiality legal?



## sanaclone (Mar 31, 2019)

There are people on FA from the US posting cartoon/animated bestiality. No one really says or complains about anything.


----------



## sanaclone (Mar 31, 2019)

I honestly don't understand.


----------



## Deleted member 82554 (Mar 31, 2019)




----------



## 1234554321 (Mar 31, 2019)

I don't recall anyone ever getting arrested over drawn beastiality, so probably


----------



## TrishaCat (Mar 31, 2019)

Yes its legal
Drawings are only illegal in the US if they're pornographic drawings of minors indistinguishable from real minors. so like hyperrealistic loli porn. There arent any other stipulations against drawn porn of any kind here.

Hypothetically someone could attempt to argue against it under obscenity laws but those are vague as hell, rarely enforced, and themselves have a stipulation of something not having artistic merit. By virtue of something being drawn, it inherently has artistic merit.


----------



## Dongding (Mar 31, 2019)




----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 31, 2019)

The answer depends on which country's laws we're discussing. 

In the United Kingdom drawn imagery of bestiality is illegal if it is 'sufficiently realistic', presumably because that could indicate the imagery is derived from photographs of real abuse, or risks promoting real abuse. 

If you see imagery that you think does promote abuse on the website, please report it- whether or not other users claim they think it's acceptable. 
You may also want to go to the suggestion box to suggest clarification of the site rules on this matter: 
forums.furaffinity.net: @@@ OFFICIAL SUGGESTION THREAD @@@


----------



## Pipistrele (Mar 31, 2019)

Nah, it's legal.


----------



## Yakamaru (Mar 31, 2019)

It's legal, but doesn't mean it's not disgusting.


----------



## dragon-in-sight (Mar 31, 2019)

Yakamaru said:


> It's legal, but doesn't mean it's not disgusting.



Calamari looks also disgusting to some but their are also people who like it. I think that's not much different. Tastes differ.


----------



## Yakamaru (Mar 31, 2019)

dragon-in-sight said:


> Calamari looks also disgusting to some but their are also people who like it. I think that's not much different. Tastes differ.


One is a dish, the other a sexual fetish for fictional anthros/humans fucking animals. False equivalency.


----------



## dragon-in-sight (Mar 31, 2019)

Yakamaru said:


> One is a dish, the other a sexual fetish for fictional anthros/humans fucking animals. False equivalency.



Fucking and eating are both biological functions, that can be enjoyed in different ways. The only difference is that eating isn't made into an ideologic topic.


----------



## Yakamaru (Mar 31, 2019)

dragon-in-sight said:


> Fucking and eating are both biological functions, that can be enjoyed in different ways. The only difference is that eating isn't made into an ideologic topic.


You have a problem with me finding it disgusting?


----------



## Liseran Thistle (Mar 31, 2019)

It's legal, but its still kind of weird cause its...animals. The idea of sexualising an animal is just kind weird to me, and I don't get the whole yiff part of the fandom even though I know it exists. Arguing with folks about yiff is always awkward because I always feel like an asshole afterwards for telling people they're odd for liking sexy drawings of wolf dudes.


----------



## Wayholka (Mar 31, 2019)

Liseran Thistle said:


> It's legal, but its still kind of weird cause its...animals. The idea of sexualising an animal is just kind weird to me, and I don't get the whole yiff part of the fandom even though I know it exists. Arguing with folks about yiff is always awkward because I always feel like an asshole afterwards for telling people they're odd for liking sexy drawings of wolf dudes.



Pretty much think the same way. I don't mind anthro art with some nudity or sensuality but I avoid the downright pornographic ones like the plague.


----------



## Jackpot Raccuki (Mar 31, 2019)

No need to beat a dead horse.
Whiles it depends on the country, here it is legal, unless it appears too realistic or at least in UK. Doesn't imply it's morally right to some though.

I'm a reasonable man, as long as you're aware of what you're doing and keep it online only and away from others, we won't have a problem.
But I prefer it cartoony as much as possible for obvious reasons.


----------



## dragon-in-sight (Mar 31, 2019)

Yakamaru said:


> You have a problem with me finding it disgusting?



No abseloutly not. What got me was the generalization. There are many depictions of fetishes I also find gross. But I wouldn't say that they're overall disgusting just because I don't like them.


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 31, 2019)

dragon-in-sight said:


> No abseloutly not. What got me was the generalization. There are many depictions of fetishes I also find gross. But I wouldn't say that they're overall disgusting just because I don't like them.



Most fetishes, even if we don't like them, can be consensual. Animal molestation can never be consensual though, so that's why lots of people will object to it- even as artistic depictions.


----------



## dragon-in-sight (Mar 31, 2019)

Fallowfox said:


> Most fetishes, even if we don't like them, can be consensual. Animal molestation can never be consensual though, so that's why lots of people will object to it- even as artistic depictions.



Ok. That's reasonable. But we're talking about cartoonish depictions here, not actual molestation.


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 31, 2019)

dragon-in-sight said:


> Ok. That's reasonable. But we're talking about depictions here, not actual molestation.


I know, some of us feel that depictions of a fantasy to do a crime like that are outside of the positive gamut of sexual expression. 

If somebody wants to fantasise about being transformed into a pair of underpants, or forced to wear clown shoes and have oatmeal poured down the back of their trousers, then that's very unusual, but I'm perfectly fine with it. 
If you love somebody enough you should pour oatmeal down their trousers for them. <3 

But when I find art which shows people fantasise about molesting horses, having sex with dead bodies, or decapitating people, I get really worried.


----------



## dragon-in-sight (Mar 31, 2019)

Fallowfox said:


> But when I find art which shows people fantasise about molesting horses, having sex with dead bodies, or decapitating people, I get really worried.



Ok I get your point here. But an affinity for gross or gorry media doesn't imply that people would tend to it reality. There are many people who like horror films like saw or hostel, for exemple. But just because someone has an affinity for morbid things doesn't mean they're torturing people in their basement.


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 31, 2019)

dragon-in-sight said:


> Ok I get your point here. But an affinity for gross or gorry media doesn't imply that people would tend to it reality. There are many people who like horror films like saw or hostel, for exemple. But just because someone has an affinity for morbid things doesn't mean they're torturing people in their basement.



Well, let's put it this way. If somebody enjoyed horror films because they like the rush of getting scared, that's fine. 

If somebody enjoyed masturbating to horror movies I'd be really scared by them.


----------



## TrishaCat (Mar 31, 2019)

I like guro kinda...

Also what about people who fantasize about having their own agency taken away? Like some people get sexual gratification from the idea of not having any control (I am also once again guilty of having this) Talking about consent in the realm of fiction is weird in general because fictional characters cant really have agency to begin with.


----------



## Yakamaru (Mar 31, 2019)

dragon-in-sight said:


> No abseloutly not. What got me was the generalization. There are many depictions of fetishes I also find gross. But I wouldn't say that they're overall disgusting just because I don't like them.


I find bestiality disgusting, and so does a lot of others. What are you trying to say here, exactly?


----------



## dragon-in-sight (Mar 31, 2019)

Fallowfox said:


> If somebody enjoyed masturbating to horror movies I'd be really scared by them.



Well. I like pictures of feral dragons in bondage, have several pictures and artists faved who draw such stuff, draw it myself and also had funtimes watching these pictures.
But I never did this to a real dragon, nor do I considder it.

maybe you should start running now.


----------



## TrishaCat (Mar 31, 2019)

Tbf feral is sometimes in this weird realm of creatures that look a lot like animals but still have some form of anthropomorphism. Even if it's just in how the eyes are drawn or maybe they're smarter than standard animal depictions. Hence why people call it feral and separate it from bestiality and whatnot.

Plus dragons arent real. Fantasy creatures are like their own realm


----------



## Fallowfox (Mar 31, 2019)

dragon-in-sight said:


> Well. I like pictures of feral dragons in bondage, have several pictures and artists faved who draw such stuff, draw it myself and also had funtimes watching these pictures.
> But I never did this to a real dragon, nor do I considder it.
> 
> maybe you should start running now.



Dragon's don't exist so I'm not exactly worried you're going to go out and abuse one!

What worries people is when they see art of humans abusing domestic animals like dogs or horses, because it leaves doubt that those artists might genuinely be interested in doing that- and might be using their art to network with others, or using it to slowly build up to actual abuse.


----------



## sanaclone (Mar 31, 2019)

Fallowfox said:


> The answer depends on which country's laws we're discussing.
> 
> In the United Kingdom drawn imagery of bestiality is illegal if it is 'sufficiently realistic', presumably because that could indicate the imagery is derived from photographs of real abuse, or risks promoting real abuse.
> 
> ...





Battlechili said:


> Yes its legal
> Drawings are only illegal in the US if they're pornographic drawings of minors indistinguishable from real minors. so like hyperrealistic loli porn. There arent any other stipulations against drawn porn of any kind here.
> 
> Hypothetically someone could attempt to argue against it under obscenity laws but those are vague as hell, rarely enforced, and themselves have a stipulation of something not having artistic merit. By virtue of something being drawn, it inherently has artistic merit.


What about the US? Particular states that are Texas, California, Florida, and North Carolina?


----------



## TrishaCat (Mar 31, 2019)

My answer was with regards to the US
I don't know individual state laws, sorry
Federally its fine though


----------



## SSJ3Mewtwo (Mar 31, 2019)

Closing this, as it seems to just be a bait thread.


----------



## CrookedCroc (Mar 31, 2019)

An alt account and incognito mode won't save you OP



 

Jk, it is legal but frown upon by a lot of ppl.


----------

