# Cub Porn nominated for Ursa Major Awards.



## bearetic (Apr 18, 2009)

I heard about this on Knotcast, which I recently started listening to:
http://www.ursamajorawards.org/
Softpaw Magazine and Finding Avalon are up for awards. Whether you think cub porn is right or wrong, at least it can't be good to have this stuff win an award. I don't want it representing the best our fandom has to offer.

Voting ends Sunday. http://www.ursamajorawards.org/

Commence shitstorm.


----------



## Lowblock (Apr 18, 2009)

Do


Not


Want


----------



## Shadow (Apr 18, 2009)

*record scratch* What?!


----------



## Takun (Apr 18, 2009)

inb4 shenzi.

Doesn't bother me.  I don't care. :V  I haven't seen either though, so I DON'T KNOW.

Young love stories are always cute though.  =o


----------



## bearetic (Apr 18, 2009)

I guess it bugs me more after hearing 5 people rant about it for 2 hours. :V
But still. It's at least something to be discussed.


----------



## Shokuji (Apr 18, 2009)

Heh, maybe if you looked at the art/quality of the products maybe you'd understand that they are good. You don't like the content, sure, it's not something everyone likes just like how other people don't like piss, scat, vomit, blood, gore, vore, necro, unbirthing, cock transformation, latex, bondage, etc, etc, etc (there are -so- many). I say bravo for not getting caught up in 'high-and-mighty' "morals" and just focusing on it's qualities.


----------



## Ceuper (Apr 18, 2009)

We're already furries, hell, why not go the extra mile?...



Maybe not.


----------



## Irreverent (Apr 18, 2009)

character said:


> Softpaw Magazine and Finding Avalon are up for awards. Whether you think cub porn is right or wrong, at least it can't be good to have this stuff win an award. I don't want it representing the best our fandom has to offer.
> 
> Voting ends Sunday. http://www.ursamajorawards.org/



Point taken, but "nominated" and "win" are two very different things. Unless they have very low entrants in the class, or very low voting requirements, its not going to win any thing.

Heck, Fur-piled is nominated for an award too.  That I could get behind.


----------



## Dahguns (Apr 18, 2009)

FFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
furries giving furries a bad name?
in the fandom? WHAAAAAHHHHH????


----------



## paxil rose (Apr 18, 2009)

Haha! Oh shit, I made a "trolling video" about this not too long ago, they got some sort of recognition in like 06 ot 07 if I'm not mistaken.

Everyone that saw it got super pissed off at me because, _clearly_, I was just making shit up to bash furries...


----------



## Toaster (Apr 18, 2009)

cub porn = fail.


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 18, 2009)

Even if it is nicely drawn and "Sugarcoated" it still considered to be Child pornography.


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 18, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> Haha! Oh shit, I made a "trolling video" about this not too long ago, they got some sort of recognition in like 06 ot 07 if I'm not mistaken.
> 
> Everyone that saw it got super pissed off at me because, _clearly_, I was just making shit up to bash furries...



Got a link to it, I wanna see.


----------



## CaptainCool (Apr 18, 2009)

i dont know that stuff. i dont really care about this but its a little concerning that this kind of content is nominated...
well, at least it seems to be about the overall quality and the storyline (is there a storyline...? i hope so^^'') and not the pornographic content itself. thats why i can live with that and why i dont really see that much of a problem


----------



## Further (Apr 18, 2009)

I always thought cub porn was illegal. Since it was like shota-com? (con maybe?) or whatever...

sorry guys not really up on my porn terminology.


----------



## Kittiara (Apr 18, 2009)

Call me when it's RL child porn winning an award; I'll probably care at that point.


----------



## paxil rose (Apr 18, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Got a link to it, I wanna see.




Indeed I do.

http://s569.photobucket.com/albums/ss140/ytevidence/?action=view&current=FurryLogic52.flv

I will admit, I do come across as condescending as all hell in this video towards the furry community, but in my defense, the people I was arguing with the the kinds of "derp derp haet cymes!" knee jerk reactionists, so this was made as a direct response to them. The people on this board are much more level headed then the people this video was evidently view by, so do try to forgive to admittedly dickish tone of it all.

Back story; a furry was busted as a pedophile. The youTube community claimed it was obviously more troll bullshit, as that simply wouldn't occur. I provided the opposition an argument.


----------



## Corto (Apr 18, 2009)

Ah, c'mon character, don't be such a crybaby. Maybe they get recognition because of for how long they've been published. Are those magazines old or are they still using diapers?


----------



## Irreverent (Apr 18, 2009)

Kittiara said:


> Call me when it's RL child porn winning an award; I'll probably care at that point.



It happened here, at a gallery in Vancouver back in the early '90s.  Also sparked off a rights debate, because it was "drawn and therefore artistic" as opposed to "photos and therefore illegal."  Caused quite a stink (and rightly so).  The artist was charged and cleared using that defense as I recall. YMMV in the US and elsewhere.

I suspect the Ursa Major awards work under the same premise.  Anyone can nominate anything, based on "merit" and the judges and votes do the elimination process.


----------



## Dahguns (Apr 18, 2009)

Could we have a furry Civil War in the near future?  I don't like what the "higher-ups" are doing.
Who wants to join my cell? xD


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 18, 2009)

paxil rose said:


> Indeed I do.
> 
> http://s569.photobucket.com/albums/ss140/ytevidence/?action=view&current=FurryLogic52.flv
> 
> ...



I heard about it and looked some of the videos up. When other furries talk about it, some disregard them, but when an issue when a furry gets caught with CP, Furries go for blind ignorance and just say it was a troll thing. Hmmph
The fandom is full of contradictory I tell ya. They can tolerate things mainstream society would deem inappropriate, but not tolerate a person who has an opinion against it.


And thanks, and i do not mind the dickish view at all.

EDIT: I think I saw your vid on youtube before.


----------



## LizardKing (Apr 18, 2009)

character said:


> I heard about this on Knotcast



Knotcast? What the fuck?


----------



## Shindo (Apr 18, 2009)

its not a big deal to me


----------



## HoneyPup (Apr 18, 2009)

Takumi_L said:


> Doesn't bother me.  I don't care. :V  I haven't seen either though, so I DON'T KNOW.
> 
> Young love stories are always cute though.  =o


I'm with you on that. It doesn't bother me at all.
If the art is good enough to win an award, let it. 

I have a question, is it adult furs with young ones or just young furs only?  And is it just a little touching or hard-core sex stuff? I'm curious but not curious enough to buy this and see.


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 18, 2009)

prettylilpup said:


> I'm with you on that. It doesn't bother me at all.
> If the art is good enough to win an award, let it.
> 
> I have a question, is it adult furs with young ones or just young furs only?  And is it just a little touching or hard-core sex stuff? I'm curious but not curious enough to buy this and see.



You can always see it for free on FA.

It's either adultXcub, CubXCub, etc...etc..


----------



## coolkidex (Apr 18, 2009)

I dont mind cub porn.
I mean, its getting an award for a reason.


----------



## Shokuji (Apr 18, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Even if it is nicely drawn and "Sugarcoated" it still considered to be Child pornography.


 First: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Treachery_of_Images

Second: Are NC/Rape pics really an act of rape? Is guro/snuff an act of murder? Is non-anthro an act of bestiality? 



CaptainCool said:


> at least it seems to be about the overall quality and the storyline (is there a storyline...? i hope so^^'') and not the pornographic content itself.


 You pretty much got it. Also, Finding Avalon was mostly story based, Softpaw was mostly yiff but it still usually had some sort of rolling story. Either way, it's really not as horrible as people think. But don't take my word for it, I'm sure you can pirate it like everyone else has.



Further said:


> I always thought cub porn was illegal. Since it was like shota-com? (con maybe?) or whatever...


 Nope. Not real, not humans, case closed.


----------



## Aden (Apr 18, 2009)

The what awards?


----------



## Irreverent (Apr 18, 2009)

Aden said:


> The what awards?



Its a major SciFi award group, similar to a Hugo or Nebulae award.


----------



## Bellini Tabloid (Apr 18, 2009)

Fuck you guys, Inuki is awesome.


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 18, 2009)

Shokuji said:


> Nope. Not real, not humans, caseYou closed.



If it has anything, drawn, sculpted, photographed, fiction or non fiction performing sexual acts, it is still kiddie porn.
Cub porn counts.



> First: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Treachery_of_Images
> 
> Second: Are NC/Rape pics really an act of rape? Is guro/snuff an act of murder? Is non-anthro an act of bestiality?



If the intents two cubs having sex, then yes it is cub porn. nothing surreal about it. If the intent is what it is made out to be for the subject matter, then that's its intent. Such as a photo of a man fucking a dog, or a Anthro bear cub having sex with an adult wolf.

But then again, blind ignorance goes to those who support it.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 18, 2009)

Shokuji said:


> First: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Treachery_of_Images
> 
> Second: Are NC/Rape pics really an act of rape? Is guro/snuff an act of murder? Is non-anthro an act of bestiality?
> 
> ...



Open your mind a bit. It would help.

As the law states right now, in may places in America and in places outside the US, *any form *of art/medium that depicts a minor preforming sexually explicit acts is considered *child-porn*, and therefore illegal. Wether you furries realize it or not, or want to admit or now, your cub porn will before the law be seen as child porn because it involves what is intended to be minors.

It does not matter to them that the "cartoon" creations are not real. 
It is anthro animals that are young, considered minorities, and they are being drawn doing sexually explicit acts.

Cub porn, as it's basic, is nothing more than children preforming sexually explicit acts, and yes they are children, they would be children if we all were actually anthro animal characters, those children characters drawn in explicit acts would be no different than humans drawing human children doing sexually explicit acts. 

I still don't understand with recent rulings in FA why he (dragoneer) continues to endanger fa's existence by allowing cub porn but that's me. You have to look at how law makers and such are going to look at it, even if it does not hurt anyone except the image of the fandom when a child porn cartoon book gets the major furry award...which I really hope does not happen. Come on furries be better than this. Porn is not art! So why should the Ursa Major Awards go to pure smut?

In any case this all would not be an issue if more of you kept your fetish's private, and then we would not have to worry about stuff like the law so much.


----------



## Defcat (Apr 18, 2009)

it seems like there are a number of contradictons that occur on FA. http://wiki.furaffinity.net/index.php/Acceptable_Upload_Policy


----------



## Bellini Tabloid (Apr 18, 2009)

Does looking at cub porn, make you sexually attracted to children?


----------



## Aden (Apr 18, 2009)

Irreverent said:


> Its a major SciFi award group, similar to a Hugo or Nebulae award.



I've heard of those two, but never the Ursa Major awards.


----------



## Bunneh45 (Apr 18, 2009)

Honestly there is nothing wrong with pedophilia as long as you don't actually go and screw a kid. I don't think cartoons of this type of thing should be a problem.

But its on legally-shaky ground and it will cast furries on a bad light (not that they are in a good light to begin with), so please don't vote for these guys.

This would be an awesome prank /b/ could pull, though, mass-voting for it.


----------



## CaptainCool (Apr 18, 2009)

Bunneh45 said:


> Honestly there is nothing wrong with pedophilia as long as you don't actually go and screw a kid.



not really... the child porn had to be made first, right? jerking of to the miserable fate of young children is just as bad in my opinion!


----------



## Takun (Apr 18, 2009)

If cub porn is illegal, it should be removed from FA so that millions of furries aren't arrested for clicking on links.  =o

/yeah, I've clicked a thumbnail and had it pop up as underage.  =|


----------



## Smelge (Apr 18, 2009)

Bunneh45 said:


> Honestly there is nothing wrong with pedophilia as long as you don't actually go and screw a kid.



Well done. You win the award for stupidest comment ever made.


----------



## Bellini Tabloid (Apr 18, 2009)

Bunneh45 said:


> Honestly there is nothing wrong with pedophilia as long as you don't actually go and screw a kid. I don't think cartoons of this type of thing should be a problem.



Point is that your promoting this behavior, so it will be inevitable for a pedo to resist the actual contact with kiddies.


----------



## Seas (Apr 18, 2009)

OP post made me rage sightly.

But those mentioned most probably won't actually win an award.

I don't care too much about the ursa awards basically, but if that thing does win, the whole awards lose value in my eyes and I think many others too...


----------



## Bunneh45 (Apr 18, 2009)

Are you guys fucking idiots?

Being a pedophile isn't criminal behavior. Being a sexual predator/offender is.

Learn the difference for god sake. There is no harm in being attracted to kids as long as you don't DO ANYTHING TO THEM.

Pure idiocy...


----------



## Takun (Apr 18, 2009)

Bunneh45 said:


> Are you guys fucking idiots?
> 
> Being a pedophile isn't criminal behavior. Being a sexual predator/offender is.
> 
> ...




If you look at child porn, somebody is making it for you.  If there was no demand, there would be no supply.


----------



## OssumPawesome (Apr 18, 2009)

Bunneh45 said:


> Are you guys fucking idiots?
> 
> Being a pedophile isn't criminal behavior. Being a sexual predator/offender is.
> 
> ...



You pedophiles are so cute when you're angry.

Allowing pedophilia to go unchallenged in the public discourse provides a cultural shelter for other pedophiles, some of whom are rapists.

You may not like it, but you're helping children get raped _even if you're not looking at child porn.

_And I doubt that someone who is such a passionate pedophile _isn't._


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 18, 2009)

Bunneh45 said:


> Are you guys fucking idiots?
> 
> Being a pedophile isn't criminal behavior. Being a sexual predator/offender is.
> 
> ...


 Umm...yes it is?  Haven't you ever heard of anyone that got arrested for having child porn on their computer or distributing it?


----------



## Bunneh45 (Apr 18, 2009)

Ugh for the love of god.

1) I'm not a pedophile
2) I'm a minor, its not even possible for me to _be_ a pedophile
3) I don't look at or like child porn
4) I never said the porn was legal, being attracted to children is legal (but definitely a bummer, and definitely illegal if you approach a kid sexually)
5) I _said_ that besides the fact that child porn is illegal and shouldn't be done, I don't see anything harmful about it.

Now, I'm not too sure about #5 and you can convince me that I'm wrong, just keep your heads for god sake. "you pedophiles", "you're helping children get raped", "you look at child porn"... cmon.

Pedophilia is the sexual fetish where you are attracted to little kids
Sex Offenders, Predators are the criminals who actually go and harm kids because of it

Pedophilia is not a crime
Being a sexual offender, predator is.

Thinking about doing something is not a crime.
Actually doing it is.

Thinking about things is not a crime, doing them is a crime. Watching movies full of gore is not a crime, going out and murdering people is a crime.

I would hope people would be more open minded and actually _thought _about some things. I *never* said pedophilia was good, I *never *said child porn was legal.

All I wanted to do was make sure you guys understood the difference between pedophilia and actually raping kids, and I get this close-minded hate for *no reason whatsoever.

*How come every single comment I make anywhere that involves a little thinking and reasoning escalates into a fight? I'll just not bother with these threads anymore. Most furries are idiots when it comes to politics it seems.


----------



## OssumPawesome (Apr 18, 2009)

*Ugh for the love of god.*



> 1) I'm not a pedophile


We can't be sure, now can we?



> 2) I'm a minor, its not even possible for me to _be_ a pedophile


Doesn't matter. If you're using your strict 'One who is attracted to children' definition, the age of the pedophile doesn't matter.



> 3) I never said it was _legal_


You said that being a pedophile wasn't _illegal._ The opposite of illegal is legal.




> 4) I never said the porn was legal, being attracted to children is legal (but definitely a bummer)


Oh look, something we can agree on.


> 5) I said that besides the fact that it is illegal and shouldn't be done, I don't see anything harmful about it.


See above post.


> Now, I'm not too sure about #5 and you can convince me that I'm wrong, just keep your heads for god sake. "you pedophiles", "you're helping children get raped", "you look at child porn"... cmon.


You'll have to forgive us. If it argues like a pedophile, bawws like a pedophile and rages like a pedophile, then it's probably...

Well, you know.



> Pedophilia is the sexual fetish where you are attracted to little kids
> Sex Offenders, Predators are the criminals who actually go and harm kids because of it
> 
> Thinking about things is not a crime, doing them is a crime. Watching movies full of gore is not a crime, going out and murdering people is a crime.
> ...





> Learn the difference for god sake. There is no harm in being attracted to kids as long as you don't DO ANYTHING TO THEM.


Those are horrible analogies.

This would be like saying "There is no harm in consistently having thoughts of brutally murdering your neighbor"

Of course there's harm in consistently fantasizing about killing someone. There might not be physical harm, but you're definitely a creepy motherfucker.



> I would hope people would be more open minded and actually _thought _about some things. I *never* said pedophilia was good, I *never *said child porn was legal.
> 
> All I wanted to do was make sure you guys understood the difference between pedophilia and actually raping kids, and I get this close-minded hate for *no reason whatsoever.
> 
> *How come every single comment I make anywhere that involves a little thinking and reasoning escalates into a fight? I'll just not bother with these threads anymore. Most furries are idiots when it comes to politics it seems.



You're the one that came screaming into the thread calling everyone else fucking idiots.


----------



## Ceuper (Apr 18, 2009)

Bunneh45 said:


> How come every single comment I make anywhere that involves a little thinking and reasoning escalates into a fight? I'll just not bother with these threads anymore. Most furries are idiots when it comes to politics it seems.



Dude, I love your input, from what I've seen. Don't stop because of the hatin', man! :smile: Though I'd stay away from calling other people fucking idiots, it's not very professional. 

As for pedophilia, some people have _exclusive paraphilias_ based around it. They got fucked up as kids, most likely, and now they can't help it. Better for them to have an outlet with porn, I say. *They still need to get help and this is no excuse not to. *

Some people can help it and make the choice to be attracted to kids, anthro or not. I *strongly disagree* with this and these people should get some damned help. 

I don't think that cub porn should be as available as it is, if at all. The more people are exposed to the stuff, the more people are going to like it. More pedophiles. I wonder how many pedophiles go for cub porn because you can't find the human stuff anywhere? I did say that some people can't help it but they should draw their own shit or keep it in their head. 

I don't want cub porn to be available at all, ideally. I definitely do not want it to represent the fandom, by obvious extension. *Very shitty. *

Those are my thoughts on this.


----------



## Bunneh45 (Apr 18, 2009)

Um, I was just offended by being called a pedophile and stupid, is that ok? 

Also, let me clarify that I meant #3 to say that pedophilia is not illegal

You agreed to #4 and #5, which was all I was arguing, sorry if I was a bit unclear. So that means we are at an agreement?

Of course I think pedophilia is a horrible thing to have, and fantasizing about killing your neighbor is an awful way to live, but no one else is being hurt by it. Now, that person should definitely seek help but no one else is harmed...

I did not come into this thread screaming, I stated my opinion and then that got called the most stupidest comment ever made among other things, and I got offended, like most human beings would when being called stupid, and showed it. Sorry I started this mess, but it would be nice if people like you didn't jump to conclusions.

I'm 16, btw, going through high school. If that is not good enough for you, then sorry, because I can't do anything to prove it. I shouldn't have to either.

*I hope this is cleared up now?* Can we have a more civil discussion now? I promise to stop calling you fucking idiots and I'll put away my red marker 

I predict the type of discussion I am having will become a major one once the gay marriage thing is settled to a point. I was hoping to have this discussion and I got a fist in the face. I understand this is a bit of a liberal point of view, thinking that drawn child porn shouldn't be illegal (which I really don't have any strong feelings about and I can probably be convinced because I am not too sure about this), _but I expect to have more respect than this_. I understand that I am peeling away tons and tons and tons of social stigma and very very heated negativity towards pedophiles (for good reason) to look at the issue objectively, but I expect to have _more respect _than this.

Edit: Aww Ceuper, music to my ears. Finally someone agrees. Thanks 
I agree that I was being a bit unprofessional, but you are pretty much talking the same way I did, bolding things and calling things "very shitty".  I'll take your advice, though, because I get angered easily and have started countless arguments in other threads because of simple, passive, opinions about things and when people react negatively to them I get a little bit too defensive.


----------



## Defcat (Apr 18, 2009)

Bunneh45 said:


> Are you guys fucking idiots?
> 
> Being a pedophile isn't criminal behavior. Being a sexual predator/offender is.
> 
> ...


 
I think this just trumped your first idiotic post. 

If you feel like continueing putting your dumbassery on display then be my guest, but I would sudggest not making yourself look like even more of a sicko.


----------



## Irreverent (Apr 18, 2009)

Aden said:


> I've heard of those two, but never the Ursa Major awards.



I was vaguely aware of it, it seems more centered on internet published then print.



Trpdwarf said:


> Wether you furries realize it or not, or want to admit or now, your cub porn will before the law be seen as child porn because it involves what is intended to be minors.



This is not the case in Canada.  There is precedent set by case-law, that says (rightly or wrongly) that "drawn or written child porn is art, photographed/videoed is illegal.:  http://archives.cbc.ca/clip.asp?page=1&IDClip=15027&IDCat=296&IDCatPa=254&IDDossier= for details.  While circa 1995, based on arrests of artists in 1993, its still current.


----------



## Bunneh45 (Apr 18, 2009)

Defcat said:


> I think this just trumped your first idiotic post.
> 
> If you feel like continueing putting your dumbassery on display then be my guest, but I would sudggest not making yourself look like even more of a sicko.



Ummm... did you see my last post?

I don't know where this is coming from, I am not condoning pedophilia in any way. Why are you getting upset about what I am saying? I resent your hateful flaming... your attacks are unfounded and insulting.

Ugh, look where thinking outside of the box gets me :/


----------



## Defcat (Apr 18, 2009)

Bunneh45 said:


> Ummm... did you see my last post?
> 
> I don't know where this is coming from, I am not condoning pedophilia in any way. Why are you getting upset about what I am saying?
> 
> Ugh, look where thinking outside of the box gets me :/


 
I read it afterwards, but my comment still applies. 

I don't think that you were quite thinking outside of the box however. You have been proven wrong multiple times by multiple people yet you continue on your dumbass parade. 

I don't have to tell you how stupid you are (this has already been accomplished), but you don't seem to be getting the messege. 

This just keeps reinforcing my belive that you are very very dumb. or, to be fair, at least very nieve.


----------



## Irreverent (Apr 18, 2009)

Ok gang, lets keep it civil.


----------



## HoneyPup (Apr 18, 2009)

bunneh, I understand what you are saying. Sorry its so frustrating to get your point across.
Seems the general attitude, and not just from furries, but from everybody, is that if you aren't totally against something like this, you are interested in it. 
One of the things you said I disagree with: you mentioned that because you are a minor, that means you can not be a pedophile. If, for example, a 16 year old is sexually attracted to 8 year olds, he/she is a pedophile. There is no arguing that one.

I do try to be open-minded, but I really don't understand the sexual  attraction to sexually-immature individuals. It just seems weird.


----------



## Aden (Apr 18, 2009)

I forgot to mention,



character said:


> I heard about this on *Knotcast*, which I recently started listening to
> 
> at least it can't be good to have this stuff win an award. I don't want it representing the *best our fandom has to offer*.



Alright then :B


----------



## Bunneh45 (Apr 18, 2009)

Defcat, can you please be civil? I'm not trying to start a fight with anyone. I am perfectly able to change my opinion if someone convinces me otherwise, but your rudeness is unacceptable.



> I don't think that you were quite thinking outside of the box however. You have been proven wrong multiple times by multiple people yet you continue on your dumbass parade.


I haven't seen anyone join in the discussion without flaming besides Ceuper. Flaming does not count as proving me wrong. None of the posts besides Ceuper's had much substance in them besides pure flame.

Please be civil and reasonable, I am willing to be convinced I am wrong, because I am not even totally sure I am right, but I am not putting up with being flamed.

Let me recap what I have tried to say:

1)
Pedophilia is the internal attraction to minors
Sexual predation is the actual committing of child molestation/rape/pornography
(These are objective facts, derived from their definitions)

2)
Since pedophilia doesn't necessarily mean kids are being molested or child porn is being made, pedophilia doesn't necessarily harm anyone besides the person who has it.

3) (the controversial one I am not sure about)
Does _drawn_ child porn harm minors? If not, should it be legal?

To try to make it clear once more I hate cub porn and I am creeped out by those who like it, and I think that it should definitly fail because it is illegal, and also because it puts the fandom in a bad light. I am disgusted that I have to continuously say this though. I shouldn't have to.



> bunneh, I understand what you are saying. Sorry its so frustrating to get your point across.
> Seems the general attitude, and not just from furries, but from everybody, is that if you aren't totally against something like this, you are interested in it.
> One of the things you said I disagree with: you mentioned that because you are a minor, that means you can not be a pedophile. If, for example, a 16 year old is sexually attracted to 8 year olds, he/she is a pedophile. There is no arguing that one.
> 
> I do try to be open-minded, but I really don't understand the sexual attraction to sexually-immature individuals. It just seems weird.


Thanks for your post 

I agree that I was a bit short-sighted to say that one can't be a pedophile if they are a minor, you're right about that. I was taking the creepy middle-age pedo stereotype too seriously and didn't think about that.

I don't understand the sexual attraction to sexually-immature individuals, but I don't understand a lot of things. Sounding, bloodplay, etc. Things don't necessarily have to be understood to everyone, though. Thats always a good attitude to have.


----------



## Kittsy (Apr 19, 2009)

Arg. I remember having a rather extended argument with someone on deviantArt about whether being a pedophile is illegal or not. I'm still not even certain whether they were confused about what the word "pedophile" means, or if they seriously thought that there were laws in the U.S. against being one.


> I agree that I was a bit short-sighted to say that one can't be a pedophile if they are a minor, you're right about that.


Weeell, in a formal psychological context, "pedophile" can be taken to refer specifically to an adult with a sexual attraction to children ...


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 19, 2009)

by Bunneh45





> 1)
> Pedophilia is the internal attraction to minors


The only difference between regular furry porn, and cub porn, is the age.

Does that not say anything to you? If you like to jack off to cub porn more so that regular porn, that does suggest a slight attraction to the under-ageless of the characters.

Now does that mean you will want to go bone a real child? No it does not.
However you have to understand the consequences of having stuff like that around in the fandom considering the way America and other countries are going right now.

Look beyond that and if people outright ban the regular drawn human child porn, pedophiles are left with turning to the furry fandom for cub porn if they find it...and in time that can turn to pedo's going in suit to prey upon children, if that makes sense?

You get beyond that and if it becomes common place that we allow cub porn which does involve sexaully explicit acts of minors, only of different races if you want to call it that, that is going to cause a huge distrust of the fandom on a whole new level, and a sudden huge distrust of suiters and mascot people who are unnassociated with the fandom.

I understand why a big con might suddenly ban something like cub porn. They are looking out for the interests of the fandom and the con as a whole.

I understand personally that cub porn does not hurt anyone except for the image of the fandom badly if it becomes common-place knowledge...I'd rather America and other countries not take such a stupid stance because if you ban the drawn version...you leave these people with little to no form of a release and I personally think that will lead to more severe cases of pedo's acting out.

Back to the topic though, it might be hard for someone who likes something to detach themselves enough to see the truth, or real problem at hand. I think that is your problem Bunneh...and the problem of every other person right bawwing about how "Cub Porn" is not child porn. They are letting their emotions and their loyalty to an art form blind them from seeing it as it really is.

Anyway the only reason this is a real issue is because rather than stay private where it belongs, the furry fandom allows it's sexual aspect to become to open, and everywhere. If things like Usra Major did not allow things like Soft Paw to be nominated, and furries as a whole just kept their shit where it belongs, we would not have this problem of a con having to ban something like cub-porn, in my opinion. Any real dealing would be so private and secret (as it should) that the con would not have to worry about those individuals getting caught, and in trouble for a stupid law.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 19, 2009)

Irreverent said:


> I was vaguely aware of it, it seems more centered on internet published then print.
> 
> 
> 
> This is not the case in Canada.  There is precedent set by case-law, that says (rightly or wrongly) that "drawn or written child porn is art, photographed/videoed is illegal.:  http://archives.cbc.ca/clip.asp?page=1&IDClip=15027&IDCat=296&IDCatPa=254&IDDossier= for details.  While circa 1995, based on arrests of artists in 1993, its still current.



Don't take my post out of context...I did state earlier that in places like American and other countries...yeah in some places they might have not done that but the reality is there are still places that do. So many if people want to be able to throw around they are into something that really is a form of pedophilia, maybe they should go throw it around in countries that don't care/won't take silly little stances like "We're going to ban drawn child porn so we can pretend we're combating a serious issue, when in reality it only makes it worse".


----------



## Shokuji (Apr 19, 2009)

Exunod said:


> We can't be sure, now can we?


 "We"? Speak for yourself, and only yourself; You don't represent anyone else here.

And no one can be sure about anything. Everyone is innocent till proven guilty, and I doubt anyone here is a lawyer.. not to mention this isn't a court of law.



Defcat said:


> I think this just trumped your first idiotic post.


 What he said is true. Thought isn't action, and it's the action that gets you in trouble. You can think about murder all day, but that legally means nothing unless you act on it. Your post is the idiotic one because you're absolutely wrong.



Bunneh45 said:


> I don't know where this is coming from, I am not condoning pedophilia in any way. Why are you getting upset about what I am saying? I resent your hateful flaming... your attacks are unfounded and insulting. Ugh, look where thinking outside of the box gets me :/


 You're finding out the hard way that furries can be the meanest, most hateful people on the planet. Part of it is because people are 'safe' behind their screen names, knowing they can pretty much say what they want with basically no chance of any repercussions. I think Penny Arcade said it best: "Normal person + Anonymity + Audience = Total fuckwad" (http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19/)


----------



## Vintage (Apr 19, 2009)

and that's curtain call!

you reap what you sow, i guess.


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Apr 19, 2009)

All this fuss over doodles, my Lord.


No wonder I never blossomed.


----------



## Bunneh45 (Apr 19, 2009)

> You're finding out the hard way that furries can be the meanest, most hateful people on the planet. Part of it is because people are 'safe' behind their screen names, knowing they can pretty much say what they want with basically no chance of any repercussions. I think Penny Arcade said it best: "Normal person + Anonymity + Audience = Total fuckwad" (http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/03/19/)


Yeah, I've learned my lesson. I had no idea what I originally said would be blown so out of proportion... 

I can't wait until I get to college and there might be more like-minded people there that know how to carry on a debate without spewing misplaced hate and anger. I go to a very open-minded high-school but most of the people there are stuck at the moral reasoning of "if it breaks the law its bad" and haven't progressed to the reasoning that takes into account rights people should have. It takes a bit of arrogance for me to say this, I guess, but looking at some of the responses I got at first I can't help it at all.

Hrrmmm :| Thanks to the last 3 people that posted, though.

Ok, enough whining 

Trpdwarf:



> Does that not say anything to you? If you like to jack off to cub porn more so that regular porn, that does suggest a slight attraction to the under-ageless of the characters.


I agree... in fact, it pretty much guarantees that one has an attraction to the under-aged.



> Now does that mean you will want to go bone a real child? No it does not.
> However you have to understand the consequences of having stuff like that around in the fandom considering the way America and other countries are going right now.


Yeah, now is probably not the time for this type of debate to become widespread, but I predict it will become big eventually. The next social debate, I guess.



> Look beyond that and if people outright ban the regular drawn human child porn, pedophiles are left with turning to the furry fandom for cub porn if they find it...and in time that can turn to pedo's going in suit to prey upon children, if that makes sense?


Well, if they go and ban child porn, I doubt they will specify that they are banning just human child porn. If child porn is banned it will probably include both furry and human. Though, it has already been banned and I really don't think pedos are flocking here just for the child porn, they probably have pedophilia in addition to a liking of furry art.



> You get beyond that and if it becomes common place that we allow cub porn which does involve sexaully explicit acts of minors, only of different races if you want to call it that, that is going to cause a huge distrust of the fandom on a whole new level, and a sudden huge distrust of suiters and mascot people who are unnassociated with the fandom.


I think the normal furry porn is bizarre and strange enough that cub porn wouldn't be too much of an issue.



> I understand why a big con might suddenly ban something like cub porn. They are looking out for the interests of the fandom and the con as a whole.
> 
> I understand personally that cub porn does not hurt anyone except for the image of the fandom badly if it becomes common-place knowledge...I'd rather America and other countries not take such a stupid stance because if you ban the drawn version...you leave these people with little to no form of a release and I personally think that will lead to more severe cases of pedo's acting out.


I agree with the last part. Just like violent movies/video games child porn is probably more of an outlet for them instead of something that will make them more ready to child rape someone. It has been documented that violent crimes decrease after a violent movie comes out, I wouldn't be surprised if the same goes for pedophiles.

Drawn porn isn't just an outlet for pedophiles, it is an outlet for pretty much anyone who has a fetish that is impossible to pursue, like snuff or macrophilia, etc.



> Back to the topic though, it might be hard for someone who likes something to detach themselves enough to see the truth, or real problem at hand. I think that is your problem Bunneh...and the problem of every other person right bawwing about how "Cub Porn" is not child porn. They are letting their emotions and their loyalty to an art form blind them from seeing it as it really is.


I do not quite understand what you are saying here... I never said cub porn wasn't child porn (It most definitly is IMO), and my original post was an unheated, passive opinion. I got all heated because of the insults I recieved, not because I care too much about the fate of child porn.



> Anyway the only reason this is a real issue is because rather than stay private where it belongs, the furry fandom allows it's sexual aspect to become to open, and everywhere. If things like Usra Major did not allow things like Soft Paw to be nominated, and furries as a whole just kept their shit where it belongs, we would not have this problem of a con having to ban something like cub-porn, in my opinion. Any real dealing would be so private and secret (as it should) that the con would not have to worry about those individuals getting caught, and in trouble for a stupid law.


I'm with you there.


----------



## Meeew (Apr 19, 2009)

I don't like cub x adult furry porn, it seems wrong to me.

Cub x cub though, hottt :3.


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Apr 19, 2009)

I thought conventions were all about porn.


----------



## Shokuji (Apr 19, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Open your mind a bit. It would help.
> 
> As the law states right now, in may places in America and in places outside the US, *any form *of art/medium that depicts a minor preforming sexually explicit acts is considered *child-porn*, and therefore illegal. Wether you furries realize it or not, or want to admit or now, your cub porn will before the law be seen as child porn because it involves what is intended to be minors.
> 
> ...



Well, I'll just kindly say that you're wrong. If you were right, the makers of Softpaw would have been arrested long ago. Before they published Softpaw they hired a lawyer who didn't find anything shown in Softpaw as unlawful. Also, Softpaw has been inspected by U.S. Customs each time a new one has been released. Surely if there was a problem shit would have hit the fan already.

So no matter how bold and annoyingly sized you make your text, the law doesn't apply to cub porn because they are not humans. And while it may say something in the law about it being drawn, I'm nearly positive it's to cut off loopholes of real child porn that filters are applied to so it looks drawn. Fortunately law enforcement is smart enough to not waste time with cub stuff and continue focusing on real child porn that potentially harms real children.

Another example would be any shota comics being imported from Japan, it's drawn "child porn" but the difference is: It's not real!

If nothing else, they have bigger fish to fry.


----------



## Meeew (Apr 19, 2009)

Load_Blown said:


> I thought conventions were all about porn.



I'm no veteran but I'm pretty sure it's not all about the sale of porn xD


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Apr 19, 2009)

Meeew said:


> I'm no veteran but I'm pretty sure it's not all about the sale of porn xD



Well they have the artists there and they have the "After Hours" art auctions augh augh whatever.


I suppose a more accurate way to say it is there is more likely than not porn at conventions.


----------



## bearetic (Apr 19, 2009)

Bunneh45 said:


> I understand that I am peeling away tons and tons and tons of social stigma and very very heated negativity towards pedophiles (for good reason) to look at the issue objectively, but I expect to have _more respect _than this.



THIS. Although I think it's cooled down, so I'm mainly acknowledging this objective thinking flying in the face of social stigma and heated negativity.

***

Right now, I don't think the Ursa Majors are a huge deal, but they might become one if CP wins and shit blows up.

***

Which will come next, the pedophilia debate, or the bestiality debate? Either way, I'm NOT looking forward to it... -_-


----------



## Grimfang (Apr 19, 2009)

Yeah, I kind of agree with what Bunneh45 was saying. I don't think you automatically become the worst case scenario of what might turn you on. Rape fantasy would be a bigger deal in that case, methinks.
Oh, wait... I guess that sort of can be a big deal.
Regardless, CP laws really have a long way to go in the US. Things seem kind of uncertain and subject to judgement as far as I understand it. Be careful whose back you're patting, Ursa Awards...



			
				character said:
			
		

> Commence shitstorm.



Indeed, haha.


----------



## Irreverent (Apr 19, 2009)

Grimfang said:


> Regardless, CP laws really have a long way to go in the US. Things seem kind of uncertain and subject to judgement as far as I understand it. Be careful whose back you're patting, Ursa Awards...



I wonder if that's their goal in the end.  Trying to codify the law/case-law by taking a stand and forcing the issue.  An artistic form of social engineering.


----------



## HoneyPup (Apr 19, 2009)

Bunneh45 said:


> I can't wait until I get to college and there might be more like-minded people there that know how to carry on a debate without spewing misplaced hate and anger. I go to a very open-minded high-school but most of the people there are stuck at the moral reasoning of "if it breaks the law its bad" and haven't progressed to the reasoning that takes into account rights people should have. It takes a bit of arrogance for me to say this, I guess, but looking at some of the responses I got at first I can't help it at all.
> ....
> 
> I agree with the last part. Just like violent movies/video games child porn is probably more of an outlet for them instead of something that will make them more ready to child rape someone. It has been documented that violent crimes decrease after a violent movie comes out, I wouldn't be surprised if the same goes for pedophiles.
> ...



Don't assume that college students are going to be open-minded. Sure some of them are, but not all of them actually think.

I was thinking this too, about it being an outlet. People argue against video games and movies saying they cause crime, but I'm not exactly sure. However, the problem with this is each individual is going to think differently. For example, for one person it may be an outlet, but for another it could put idea's into their heads, like "that looks like fun" and then think about how to get their neighbor's child alone with them. I'm not so sure about that one. Maybe I'm overthinking it.


----------



## Irreverent (Apr 19, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Don't take my post out of context...I did state earlier that in places like American and other countries...yeah in some places they might have not done that but the reality is there are still places that do.



Sorry for that, I wasn't taking it out of context, I was trying to re-enforce your position with a documented example.  I probably could have been more articulate.


----------



## Further (Apr 19, 2009)

Topicality:

Definiton 1: Pedophile - An adult who is sexually attracted to a child or children.

Definition 2: Pedophile - In law enforcement, the term "pedophile" is generally used to describe those accused or convicted of the sexual abuse of a minor (including both prepubescent children and adolescent minors younger than the local age of consent).


Being a pedophile (under definition 1) isn't illegal; however, when a pedophile attempts the acts described in definiton 2, they are considered to be wrong, and therefor there acts are illegal.


Being a pedophile is illegal in definition 2, while in definition one it is not.

both are valid definitions, but rely on how you are using them.


I believe pedophilia (under definition 1) is wrong because I think it's disturbing since pedophilia often leads to abuse, but I condemn no one for it because I believe it's a mental disorder, that's not an excuse mind you, but I don't think pedophiles need to be as annexed from society as they are I think they need help.

Cubporn is childporn, but this really can't be contested, but it's not human childporn which makes puts it on moral/legal shaky ground.


This is the reason why it can be argued as being ok... whether I agree or not.


The majority of the previous post were riddeled with logical fallcies, miscommunication, and he said/ she said argumentation, which are inherently abusive towards an organized discussion (debates). 


You need to find common terms before procceeding...


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia#cite_note-ames-12


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 19, 2009)

Shokuji said:


> Well, I'll just kindly say that you're wrong. If you were right, the makers of Softpaw would have been arrested long ago. Before they published Softpaw they hired a lawyer who didn't find anything shown in Softpaw as unlawful. Also, Softpaw has been inspected by U.S. Customs each time a new one has been released. Surely if there was a problem shit would have hit the fan already.
> 
> So no matter how bold and annoyingly sized you make your text, the law doesn't apply to cub porn because they are not humans. And while it may say something in the law about it being drawn, I'm nearly positive it's to cut off loopholes of real child porn that filters are applied to so it looks drawn. Fortunately law enforcement is smart enough to not waste time with cub stuff and continue focusing on real child porn that potentially harms real children.
> 
> ...



California law and Virginia Law, (no time to shift through other states):

 "The PROTECT Act of 2003[1] and 18 USC 1466A[2] remain the law in California. This law prohibits producing, distributing, receiving, or possessing with intent to distribute, an obscene visual depiction of any kind, including a drawing, cartoon, sculpture, or painting, of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct. Fiction is no defense; the law says, "It is not a required element of any offense under this section that the minor depicted actually exist.""


It is still Kiddie porn regardless under the eyes of the law. If a Court doesn't see it or someone passes it over, sure, they don't get caught.  But regardless, fiction isn't a defense for CP. It won't be a defense for Cub porn, because the subject matter still displays minors engaging in sexual acts.

You can't beat around the bush when it comes to the fact. The fact is the difference between Furry porn and cub porn is the intended age.That's what the courts will pay attention to, not how "Nicely drawn" it is.


----------



## Werevixen (Apr 19, 2009)

If only guillotine executions were still allowed.


----------



## Shokuji (Apr 19, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> The fact is the difference between Furry porn and cub porn is the intended age.That's what the courts will pay attention to, not how "Nicely drawn" it is.


 Someone could defend that the intended difference is the cuteness, or because this is dealing with animals there's a natural size difference. But no matter how you look at it, it's still fake. Realistically for anyone involved, it doesn't matter what the "intended age" is, just like it doesn't matter if the character killing another in Snuff art is guilty of murder or not.

Also, It's kind of sad to see such broad, sweeping 'laws' like that though. So much potential for abuse by law enforcement. Laws should be very specific, itemized, leave no room for any guess work or interpretation.


----------



## Takun (Apr 19, 2009)

prettylilpup said:


> Don't assume that college students are going to be open-minded. Sure some of them are, but not all of them actually think.
> 
> I was thinking this too, about it being an outlet. People argue against video games and movies saying they cause crime, but I'm not exactly sure. However, the problem with this is each individual is going to think differently. For example, for one person it may be an outlet, but for another it could put idea's into their heads, like "that looks like fun" and then think about how to get their neighbor's child alone with them. I'm not so sure about that one. Maybe I'm overthinking it.



Psych major here.  They do increase aggression and violence in children.  I've seen enough experiments to convince me.


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 19, 2009)

Goddammit guys. Unless it's a real kid it doesn't fucking matter either way.


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Apr 19, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> Goddammit guys. Unless it's a real kid it doesn't matter fucking either way.



Har har. :3


No but I agree with Gazebo here.


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 19, 2009)

No one will never get my name right :[


----------



## Werevixen (Apr 19, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> No one will never get my name right :[



Placenzi?


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 19, 2009)

Werevixen said:


> Placenzi?


Placebo or Shenzi, pick one >:[


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Apr 19, 2009)

Gazzy, why are you so upset?


----------



## Werevixen (Apr 19, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> Placebo or Shenzi, pick one >:[



Placenta it is.


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 19, 2009)

Load_Blown said:


> Gazzy, why are you so upset?





Werevixen said:


> Placenta it is.


 
>:[
Screw you guys


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 19, 2009)

Shokuji said:


> Someone could defend that the intended difference is the cuteness, or because this is dealing with animals there's a natural size difference. But no matter how you look at it, it's still fake. Realistically for anyone involved, it doesn't matter what the "intended age" is, just like it doesn't matter if the character killing another in Snuff art is guilty of murder or not.
> 
> Also, It's kind of sad to see such broad, sweeping 'laws' like that though. So much potential for abuse by law enforcement. Laws should be very specific, itemized, leave no room for any guess work or interpretation.




Oh yes...cute Porn. -eyeroll-

The law is specific. 
I am am in the City government. I spent a fair bit of time looking at the laws to enforce them. I have to stay on top of the laws to enforce them.  Fiction is not a defense, as per stated in the law and the law where I live and other places where it is enforced. You can't get anymore specific than that. 

Ahh, silly furries...When it comes to fetishes, logic becomes secondary to the stuff they "yank their jank" to. You can like it, but you have to recognize it for what it is for.


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 19, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> You can like it, but you have to recognize it for what it is for.


Like how furry itself is basically bestiality? :V


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 19, 2009)

Shokuji said:


> Well, I'll just kindly say that you're wrong. If you were right, the makers of Softpaw would have been arrested long ago. Before they published Softpaw they hired a lawyer who didn't find anything shown in Softpaw as unlawful. Also, Softpaw has been inspected by U.S. Customs each time a new one has been released. Surely if there was a problem shit would have hit the fan already.
> 
> So no matter how bold and annoyingly sized you make your text, the law doesn't apply to cub porn because they are not humans. And while it may say something in the law about it being drawn, I'm nearly positive it's to cut off loopholes of real child porn that filters are applied to so it looks drawn. Fortunately law enforcement is smart enough to not waste time with cub stuff and continue focusing on real child porn that potentially harms real children.
> 
> ...



And I laugh at you and your inability to use anything but outdated irrelevant information. It's funny how you'll say I am wrong, you cannot explain why, all you are doing right now is dancing around the facts as if they don't exist.

It is irrelevant if "Softpaw" hired a "lawyer" because at that time the laws were different than they are now. What we are seeing is a new string of laws coming out to leave Pedophiles with nothing to turn to. Wether you people realize it or now, or admit it or now, what you all are looking at is and will be consider borderline child porn before the eyes of the law.

Relax, no where is attacking you exactly for liking the stuff. They're just pointing out the current implications which led to that convention in Cali deciding to do what it did. Of course I understand half the fandom is incapable of seeing that being told something simple like "Keep your fetish's where they belong" is not the same as hating a person's being. Regardless...the fandom has to look out for itself due to people being stupid when it comes to the porn.

Again, what part of "This is new" do you not understand? It can very well become a problem very soon if someone decides to sit down and look at it when inspecting it and realize ....wait....and then think. The argument "If it has not yet been a problem yet it won't therefore you are wrong" is pathetic and it's stupid. The law changes...it evolves. As it evolves what used to be okay often becomes not okay, what you could get away with suddenly you don't. It will be interesting to see how long before the world catches on in places that put bans on CP realize that the furry fandom has an outlet for pedo's.

If I bolded my text it is because I am trying to get through the thick skulls some of you have. You are so up in arms over defending your fetish it's disgusting. You could choose to keep it more private and not allow something like Softpaw to get a nomination by not having it nominated to begin with but that's a big problem in this fandom and it's not going away any time soon because too many perverts just don't understand why they should not wave around publicly or online or at meets or at a cons what fetish happens to give them a turn on.

Several people here and in other forums keep bringing up the same actual text that makes it irrelevant that cub porn subjects are not human. You keep ignoring that if it makes you sleep better at night.

Cup Porn with current new law standing's in growing places around world crosses into being interpreted as child porn by outsiders and the law, and it is only a matter of time before that something bad happens. I'm going to laugh when it does because it'll bring up an even bigger bawstorm that California con is stirring up by beings smart and protecting itself.

EDIT: Shota porn is now illegal to import to places like California and Virginia. In fact a guy was arrested in Virginia for importing it form Japan. Seems to me for someone who keeps wagging his tounge, he has no grasp on the actual topic and isn't even up to date on it. You should stop while your ladder can still get you out of the hole you are digging.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 19, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> Like how furry itself is basically bestiality? :V



No more like the drawn Feral porn that zoophilies like to upload in FA crosses that line into bestiality.


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 19, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> No more like the drawn Feral porn that zoophilies like to upload in FA crosses that line into bestiality.


But feral art is hawt--

You know, I think I'm just gonna shut up.


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Apr 19, 2009)

I wonder what would happen if I were to whack it to a picture of myself as a naked baby.....


----------



## Irreverent (Apr 19, 2009)

Load_Blown said:


> I wonder what would happen if I were to whack it to a picture of myself as a naked baby.....



You'd get an infraction for drifting off topic....


----------



## Further (Apr 19, 2009)

Interestingly enough that could be on topic...if it were phrased differently.

As:

"Is it illegal to perform sexual acts with yourself or another towards pornographic material of yourself as a minor."


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Apr 19, 2009)

Well there have been cases where kids get tagged with possession of child pornography for sending naked pics of themselves to others.


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 19, 2009)

Yeah, there was a thirteen year old who was arrested for having child porn...of herself. Just nude pics apparently.


----------



## Meeew (Apr 19, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> Yeah, there was a thirteen year old who was arrested for having child porn...of herself. Just nude pics apparently.



That makes...little sence xD


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 19, 2009)

Meeew said:


> That makes...little sence xD


Apparently she had "the possibility of distributing" the pics. It was stupid of her to have the pics, but it's even stupider to arrest her for it. (Imo)


----------



## Further (Apr 19, 2009)

I've seen 4 or 5 articles on digg about this sorta thing...

Life sucks you know?


----------



## foxmusk (Apr 19, 2009)

all that i can muster is "goddammit furries".


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 19, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> Like how furry itself is basically bestiality? :V



If it crosses into uncanny valley, it can be.


----------



## Shokuji (Apr 20, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> And I laugh at you and your inability to use anything but outdated irrelevant information. It's funny how you'll say I am wrong, you cannot explain why, all you are doing right now is dancing around the facts as if they don't exist.


 Only a few months old is out dated? By my example you are wrong, but what you're saying is that they got lucky all 5 times? Dancing around what facts, my real-world examples or your words? In the end, this is all just entertainment for me because no matter what I say, or you say, it just doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is how the lawyers twist the laws to their advantage so they can get people, who've not harmed anyone, in trouble. 



> It is irrelevant if "Softpaw" hired a "lawyer" because at that time the laws were different than they are now.


 Why did you quote lawyer? I'm pretty sure that you don't believe a thing I'm typing. But that aside, you don't even know what the laws are in the state they reside in, could be different. I don't care enough to actually go look myself. *shrugs*



> What we are seeing is a new string of laws coming out to leave Pedophiles with nothing to turn to.


 Does this sound like a good idea to you? Leaving people who are already desperate with literally nothing left to 'turn to' (for release)? Sounds like a formula for disaster if you ask me. What's going to happen is that things are going to be taken way, way underground where things become way more dangerous.

It's a tad off topic but somewhat relevant; I wish I had a link, but in some country they had a real drug problem. A park was over run with people abusing drugs in plain daylight. Instead of adding more punishments to their laws they removed the illegal status of those drugs and started selling them as a part of a rehab program for practically free. Because it was so cheap there was less crime because people could afford the drugs. And over time people kicked the addiction, so now that park I mentioned has no drug abusers loitering around in it.

Take what you will from that.



> It will be interesting to see how long before the world catches on in places that put bans on CP realize that the furry fandom has an outlet for pedo's.


 And that the furry fandom is an outlet for zoophiles, and snuff art is an outlet for murderers, and non-consensual art is an outlet for rapists and... I'm sorry if I keep resorting to this, but you can't single one thing out because we're talking about art here. So if you want to squash cubs then you best be ready to squash just about everything that makes up 'the fandom' and possibly the fandom itself.



> You are so up in arms over defending your fetish it's disgusting.


 I'm up in arms? Or was that more of a general statement? I mean, I like debating stuff and I like playing devils advocate a bit too, but I'm not upset or angry or whatever. 



> Several people here and in other forums keep bringing up the same actual text that makes it irrelevant that cub porn subjects are not human. You keep ignoring that if it makes you sleep better at night.


 You certainly do assume lots about other people. But you know what makes me lose sleep? How laws are used to abuse people who are not causing any real harm. But it's easy for most people, apparently like yourself, to just toss them in with the real predators, the real abusive child rapists.



> Seems to me for someone who keeps wagging his tounge, he has no grasp on the actual topic and isn't even up to date on it. You should stop while your ladder can still get you out of the hole you are digging.


 I'm digging a hole? You really do assume a lot of other people. That's a nasty habit you should keep in check. But either way I'm about done on the subject anyways, because it really doesn't matter how correct you or I am. Thanks for being so entertaining though!


----------



## Whitenoise (Apr 20, 2009)

Shokuji said:


> And that the furry fandom is an outlet for zoophiles, and snuff art is an outlet for murderers, and non-consensual art is an outlet for rapists and... I'm sorry if I keep resorting to this, but you can't single one thing out because we're talking about art here. So if you want to squash cubs then you best be ready to squash just about everything that makes up 'the fandom' and possibly the fandom itself.



Sounds about right to me, in order to create you must destroy. The death of the furry fandom would be nothing but a benefit to the minute artistic community within it :V .


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Apr 20, 2009)

Whitenoise said:


> The death of the furry fandom would be nothing but a benefit to the minute artistic community within it :V .



Yeah it's true listen to the cat.


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 20, 2009)

Load_Blown said:


> Yeah it's true listen to the cat.



Dark times are upon us. Repent, repent!!!!!


----------



## Slade (Apr 20, 2009)

Cub porn sucks, end of story.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 20, 2009)

Shokuji said:


> Only a few months old is out dated? By my example you are wrong, but what you're saying is that they got lucky all 5 times? Dancing around what facts, my real-world examples or your words? In the end, this is all just entertainment for me because no matter what I say, or you say, it just doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is how the lawyers twist the laws to their advantage so they can get people, who've not harmed anyone, in trouble.
> 
> Why did you quote lawyer? I'm pretty sure that you don't believe a thing I'm typing. But that aside, you don't even know what the laws are in the state they reside in, could be different. I don't care enough to actually go look myself. *shrugs*
> 
> ...



In the world and law and politics it can very easily be outdated. That is not the only way that the Lawyer's word is irrelevant. Let us say Softpaw were based in Canada. Canada has not made a law against the drawn child porn. So in that area there may be nothing wrong.

Move on, go to a US State where it is not yet illegal to buy, sell, or view drawn child porn, or minors engaging in sexually explicit activities. For that area the lawyer can find no problem with Softpaw. Bam, take into consideration all current laws in Australia, in Virginia, in California, suddenly you have a problem....due to current recent laws that can into play some of which are little more than 1 to 2 months old. I seriously doubt that the lawyer really did anything at all of use. If he were a good one he would line out where there would be problems and where there are not. If he said "There is nothing wrong" than either it was back during a time before these new laws cropped up or he's just an ignorant twat that should drop the practice.

Moving on, I never made a comment on wether or not it is good or bad to deprive people of a last resort of that one thing to turn to did I? I will not comment on it because it is not the topic of this discussion. I did say however that if people who were into things like cub porn kept it more private...than we would not have a problem.

Also your drug thing....what the con in California is trying to do is akin to a restraunt making it's smoking crowd not smoke inside the building. What is going on right now, people are cracking down on Child Porn. The con staff at the con will understand that it is highly possible that people can take a look at Cub Porn, interpret it as a form of Child Porn and then "Bam" have a problem.

So they are making it so that you do not have it on the premises. Which in all honesty it not a bad move. It means that you are preventing it from becoming a problem, a bit like not having smokers smoking up a cloud in a restruant prevents the associated health problems caused to the surrounding people. Even if you turn around and make a "Smoker only area" you force the people who serve to inhale that nasty cancer causing thing.

Now maybe you still have a problem with entry into the res truant, just as you may have a problem with entry into the furry fandom and coming across CP and someone reporting it and it being taken a bad way...but better to lessen the risk than magnify it by having it in a place where child porn in drawn form is illegal, and fiction is not going to work as a viable excuse as so stated in the actual text of the law.

The furry fandom is not an outlet for zoo-philes. Feral art is. Get your information straight. The thing is though truth wills out, which is why a certain user no longer is part of FA....she got found out as not only a person who drew disturbing feral art that crossed into uncanny vally suggesting zoophilia, but she was sniffed out to be a dog fucker who has already psychologically destroyed one dog and plans to obliterate the mind of another.

So don't bring that up....Anthro animal porn is not the same as feral animal porn. You have to cross a certain line, and that line is feral animal in order to get into a problem with bestiality, just as you have to intend and draw a subject in porn to have a young age in order for the problem to crop up of pedophilia.

Stop bringing up red herrings. We are talking about Cub Porn, in which the only difference between it and furry porn is the intended age. The main subject revolves around not banning it but what a certain con is doing to protect itself. I personally bring up the only real cure which is for people to start being smart and keeping their porn private and not plastering the internet with it. That is not the same as "Banning it". I would also suggest that if this stuff is to stay than people who are into need to accept a certainly thing. People in the fandom should be just as cautious and feral porn makers and those who enjoy it as people who are cub porn makers and those who enjoy it. Either could harbor individuals who use it as an outlet and if even liking the stuff does not mean you will act on it, the danger is there.

Anyway, if you want to talk about "Problems with banning it or anything related" don't talk to me about it because I'm not suggestion a ban, only pointing out the cold reality, and shoving all the consequences of the CP in different contexts in everyone's faces so maybe they might think about more than themselves.

You was partially a more general statement because it is sick how people are coming in and trying to blatantly deny what CP is. It's a bit like how certain fat furs got up in arms when their fatty inflation art that they originally dubbed a fetish was suddenly being called one and suddenly they wanted to backpedal and say "No, no, no" to make it appropriate for a banner. That's a bit off topic though.

I don't understand why in this diverse fandom of ours people get so butt-hurt when what they are into is called out upon for what it really is or if people are brave enough to say, I don't like it so don't force me to look at it. I'll be damned if furries don't make it an art of bawwing and throwing huge tantrums because decency and courtesy are too much to ask.

I only assume when I know enough about something to do so. But then again you are assuming many things about me when I have not even stated things and you borderline accuse me of them with the way you throw around words. I'll only say this once and you either listen or you don't. I never made a jump to saying that we should ban Cub Porn. I never made a jump and said that liking Cub Porn means you want to diddle a kid. I never made a jump to say that that I equate Pedophilia as meaning "I'm a child rapist". So don't put words into my mouth or try to make it out to be that I am saying what I am not.

Now...respond and stay on topic or just let this die.


----------



## Bunneh45 (Apr 21, 2009)

Jeez, calm down. No need to be so patronizing o_o

I'm enjoying this thread but your posts are so hard to read like that...


----------



## ForestFox91 (Apr 22, 2009)

The only thing nominated should be general furry art. You know, normal stuff...


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 22, 2009)

ForestFox91 said:


> The only thing nominated should be general furry art. You know, normal stuff...


No such thing as normal.

I say if it's good art, nominate it. Even if the content is "OMG FETISH".


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 22, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> No such thing as normal.
> 
> I say if it's good art, nominate it. Even if the content is "OMG FETISH".



Art /=/ porn


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 22, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Art /=/ porn


Oh noes pornographic content and/or nudity. Seriously, if you give a fuck then you're really trying too hard.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 22, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> Oh noes pornographic content and/or nudity. Seriously, if you give a fuck then you're really trying too hard.



Oh noes....someone possibly butt-hurt over the reality that...

porn/=/art

EDIT: I don't care how much any of you failflail...porn /=/ art

Imagine if the best photography award (should that exist) went to a porn shoot...think people might be upset?
It's no different if a furry art award goes to a cub porn mag.
It's no different if all the awards for movies went to porn flicks. Imagine that..."So and so got this many nominations because he manage to capture that person's pussy in just the right way"...

To tell people...well if it bothers you than you care to much..well fuck that. You don't give these kinds of awards to smut. The idea it then puts across to all those people out there who make stuff...it does not bare to be thought about. That's like saying "well, yeah you put all that time and energy into that wonderful painting of tasteful nudity that not only has all the proportions correct but it's so beautiful it's surreal...but we're going to give the award to the person over there who painted a picture of a human with a dick in it's butt while sucking another human's cock, because it gives me a hard on."

Tasteful nudity = art
Porn/smut /=/ art


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 22, 2009)

So if you were to draw a picture with a nude character, it's just porn, right? I can't possibly classify anything as art if it has a fap factor! :V

I'm slightly ashamed of you, Trp.


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 22, 2009)

Trpdwarf, what about all the great paintings/statues in history that have fully nude people in them that are held in great renown?  Are those not suddenly art because the porn nowadays that isn't art?  I'll agree with you on porn =\= art, but nudity=\= porn.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 22, 2009)

Jashwa said:


> Trpdwarf, what about all the great paintings/statues in history that have fully nude people in them that are held in great renown?  Are those not suddenly art because the porn nowadays that isn't art?  I'll agree with you on porn =\= art, but nudity=\= porn.



You responded while I was editing my post.
Read edited version where I clarified what you brought up.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 22, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> So if you were to draw a picture with a nude character, it's just porn, right? I can't possibly classify anything as art if it has a fap factor! :V
> 
> I'm slightly ashamed of you, Trp.



It should be obvious with someone of my intelligence that when i say "porn" I mean "Porn" not "Tasteful Nudity." Especially considering the original post you are referring to said

Porn/=/ art

NOT

Porn/tasteful nudity /=/ Art.


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 22, 2009)

So, say Blotch. Blotch makes porn. Does that mean they're not artists? No, it means they draw porn, which is art. The hypocrisy in this thread astounds me. If your favorite artist drew porn, would that make it not art? 

The only reason people are saying it's not art is because it's "oh noes fetish".


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 22, 2009)

Jashwa said:


> Trpdwarf, what about all the great paintings/statues in history that have fully nude people in them that are held in great renown?  Are those not suddenly art because the porn nowadays that isn't art?  I'll agree with you on porn =\= art, but nudity=\= porn.




There's a difference between tasteful Nudity and Porn. 

Like the Venus of Urbino

Or

Manet's Olympia


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 22, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> There's a difference between tasteful Nudity and Porn.
> 
> Like the Venus of Orbino.



Most furries don't know this difference or so it seems to me.

This makes me a saad panda. I agree and have already stated such. There is a difference.


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 22, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Most furries don't know this difference or so it seems to me.
> 
> This makes me a saad panda. I agree and have already stated such. There is a difference.


 
He was probably just another person who started posting or was ready to post before you went back and edited your post.  Plus, he was agreeing that there was a difference, so what's your problem?


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 22, 2009)

Jashwa said:


> He was probably just another person who started posting or was ready to post before you went back and edited your post.  Plus, he was agreeing that there was a difference, so what's your problem?



She did...She didn't see the Image edit.


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 22, 2009)

ITT: Porn and fetishes are srs bsuiness.


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 22, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> ITT: Porn and fetishes are srs bsuiness.


Apparently! I haven't seen this much butthurt since the Thanksgiving banner.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 22, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> So, say Blotch. Blotch makes porn. Does that mean they're not artists? No, it means they draw porn, which is art. The hypocrisy in this thread astounds me. If your favorite artist drew porn, would that make it not art?
> 
> The only reason people are saying it's not art is because it's "oh noes fetish".



....

We are talking about art. Not Artists.

If you cannot understand why being a drawer or maker of porn is not what makes Blotch an artist, I cannot help you.


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 22, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> Apparently! I haven't seen this much butthurt since the Thanksgiving banner.



Furries will defend their stuff to the dying breath. It could be romaticized and seen as an honorable battle against all odds and end in tragedy...but it's kinda patetic in the least.

Hmm...Maybe I should do a Romanticism painting...I shall call it "The Passon of the fetish" or "Passion of the Porn".

I can experiment with Corel painter.


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 22, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> ....
> 
> We are talking about art. Not Artists.
> 
> If you cannot understand why being a drawer or maker of porn is not what makes Blotch an artist, I cannot help you.


I know what you mean. I understand what you're trying to say, but it simply doesn't sit well with me. If it's high-quality work (even with the purpose of fapping) it's still art.


----------



## Jashwa (Apr 22, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Furries will defend their stuff to the dying breath. It could be romaticized and seen as an honorable battle against all odds and end in tragedy...but it's kinda patetic in the least.
> 
> Hmm...Maybe I should do a Romanticism painting...I shall call it "The Passon of the fetish" or "Passion of the Porn".
> 
> I can experiment with Corel painter.


 
Passion of the Porn reminds me of Children of the Corn for some reason, except probably more disturbing.


----------



## Ozriel (Apr 22, 2009)

Jashwa said:


> Passion of the Porn reminds me of Children of the Corn for some reason, except probably more disturbing.



LOL, sorry.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 22, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> Apparently! I haven't seen this much butthurt since the Thanksgiving banner.



Funny how when a legitimate problem is possibly found everyone but the people into it are able to see things as they are. If the thing that has a possible problem happens to be someone's fetish or sexual porn preference the bawwing increases tenfold while the bawwers refuse to listen because they plug up their ears and put baby'furs to shame.

Then of course people act like some part of them, is being brutally attacked, and poor them....taken up the banner of victim. How dare someone state an honest opinion, or a fact.

EDIT: That is in reference to the fetish banner and the whole cub porn thing...and has no meaning of animosity towards you. I just find it funny it is an observation in response to your post...which reflects a whole other thing in the fur fandom.


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 22, 2009)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Furries will defend their stuff to the dying breath. It could be romaticized and seen as an honorable battle against all odds and end in tragedy...but it's kinda patetic in the least.
> 
> Hmm...Maybe I should do a Romanticism painting...I shall call it "The Passon of the fetish" or "Passion of the Porn".
> 
> I can experiment with Corel painter.


It's because everyone is a hypocrite when it comes to fetishes.

That's all I'm going to say. I give.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 22, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> I know what you mean. I understand what you're trying to say, but it simply doesn't sit well with me. If it's high-quality work (even with the purpose of fapping) it's still art.



I'm sorry if it does not. I cannot bring myself to call porn art, at least not within the furrie fandom. I don't care how detailed it is, all I see are artists doing the same thing over and over and over again and people foaming at the mouth, and meanwhile real artists who attempt to make all sorts of diverse and interesting stuff get pushed aside.

EDIT: If it is unfair to look down on it as an artform...well...oh well. Furries sort of ruined it...it's like kids who make it worse for everyone at a school by doing something stupid and therefore everyone else has to suffer the consequences of having something taken away. To me furries  revoke themselves of the right to call their porn art. It's not art anymore, it's just one tasteless smut after another...and people wonder why I might have my safe search filter on. It's not because I don't want to see porn (I don't care for it but I won't freak out if it's there), but that I want to see more art. Although if I could get a filter to filter out fat/inflation art I'd love to do that because I'm sick of seeing it spamming up the browse thing. That and crappy MS Paint art...and other things...

Offtopic...I think everyone could benefit from being able to ommit things from the simple browse what is new thing...


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 22, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> I'm sorry if it does not. I cannot bring myself to call porn art, at least not within the furrie fandom. I don't care how details it is, all I see are artists doing the same thing over and over and over again and people foaming at the mouth, and meanwhile real artists who attempt to make all sorts of diverse and interesting stuff get pushed aside.


I can respect that. My opinion is just that all art is art, no matter the content. It can be crappy art, but still art (to me).


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 22, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> I can respect that. My opinion is just that all art is art, no matter the content. It can be crappy art, but still art (to me).



I guess I'm not that open minded. If I am going to look at something and say "Now that is art."....to me the artist had to work hard enough, and put effort into it to make it art.

I can take a poster board and make a big red circle and call it art but I'm not going to do that because I know that when it comes to painting and drawing I'm no artist.


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 22, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> I guess I'm not that open minded. If I am going to look at something and say "Now that is art."....to me the artist had to work hard enough, and put effort into it to make it art.
> 
> I can take a poster board and make a big red circle and call it art but I'm not going to do that because I know that when it comes to painting and drawing I'm no artist.


I happen to enjoy minimalism so I'd probably golf clap if you did that.


----------



## Verin Asper (Apr 22, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> I guess I'm not that open minded. If I am going to look at something and say "Now that is art."....to me the artist had to work hard enough, and put effort into it to make it art.
> 
> I can take a poster board and make a big red circle and call it art but I'm not going to do that because I know that when it comes to painting and drawing I'm no artist.


but I bet some rich person would buy it...they're into that kind of thing


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 22, 2009)

Desume Crysis Kaiser said:


> but I bet some rich person would buy it...they're into that kind of thing



...don't get me started on the wastes of flesh who buy stuff like that. It's like "HUR HUR I OWN THIS EXPENSIVE CANVAS WITH A RED DOT ON IT MADE BY A FAMOUS PAINTER!"

I want to slap people who are like that. So I wonder, would these same people buy the rock the artist spat on just to enjoy owning famous spit?


----------



## Trpdwarf (Apr 22, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> I happen to enjoy minimalism so I'd probably golf clap if you did that.



Good for you.

I happen to struggle with being a finicky picky thing, it drives people bonkers sometimes. Also...what is a golf clap?


----------



## iBolt! (Apr 22, 2009)

Takumi_L said:


> Young love stories are always cute though.  =o



Agreed 

Can't say I haven't come across a few good cub stories before... but it's not like I actually read the stuff often.


----------



## Verin Asper (Apr 22, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> ...don't get me started on the wastes of flesh who buy stuff like that. It's like "HUR HUR I OWN THIS EXPENSIVE CANVAS WITH A RED DOT ON IT MADE BY A FAMOUS PAINTER!"
> 
> I want to slap people who are like that. So I wonder, would these same people buy the rock the artist spat on just to enjoy owning famous spit?


I tend to not care for them, let them waste their money on stuff and also



Trpdwarf said:


> Good for you.
> 
> I happen to struggle with being a finicky picky thing, it drives people bonkers sometimes. Also...what is a golf clap?


its a lot quieter version of regular clapping, watch a golf game and look at some of those folks hand when they clap


----------



## Chronic (Apr 22, 2009)

Awesome, cub porn! I AM OFFENDED


----------



## bearetic (Apr 23, 2009)

Cool! A spinoff discussion! http://forums.furaffinity.net/showthread.php?t=41292



Trpdwarf said:


> Although if I could get a filter to filter out fat/inflation art I'd love to do that because I'm sick of seeing it spamming up the browse thing. That and crappy MS Paint art...and other things...
> 
> Offtopic...I think everyone could benefit from being able to omit things from the simple browse what is new thing...



Raccoondrew does some clean and interesting fatfur art, imo. I don't mind watching him and faving his work. Just felt like mentioning it.

OMIT THINGS? LIEK THAT SECOND M? LOLOL And yeah, that MIGHT be nice, but then too many people would close themselves off to an extreme.



Chronic said:


> Awesome, cub porn! I AM OFFENDED


That's the spirit!

Also, you has some cool faves: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2195701


----------



## UKtehwhitewolf (Apr 23, 2009)

This is the reason no furry has the right to yell "Fursecution!!1!" or attempt to convince people that not all furries are into porn or fetishes.  :|

It may be true that not all furries are into it, I know I'm not, but do we really have any ground to defend ourselves? Really?

I'd like to bet if this was on a troll site or a troll started using it against a group of furries we'd all be going "OMG no! We're totally against it!! How dare you say such things!! D8<".


----------



## Chronic (Apr 23, 2009)

character said:


> That's the spirit!
> 
> Also, you has some cool faves: http://www.furaffinity.net/view/2195701


That's because I don't fave the porn I look at.


----------



## Firehazard (Apr 24, 2009)

So, I came in late to this, but here's my take on things.

I consider "cub" and any other form of "virtual" (that is, not actual photographs of kids getting raped, of course) child porn to be pretty much in the same category as some of the "horror" movies we're seeing lately that are basically softcore snuff, created for people who enjoy watching people get decapitated, disemboweled, and otherwise made into Peoples 'N' Bits.  Namely, I would not call for a blanket banning of the material itself, but I consider the people who enjoy it to be seriously fucked up in the head, and I don't think we as a culture should be glorifying it.  For example, analagous to what's going on here, if I woke up one morning and found that _Saw XVII_ won Best Picture, I might be compelled to put a bullet in my head because I would realize I was living in a world I no longer wanted to be a part of.

ADDENDUM: To those who are still complaining that FurAffinity doesn't ban cub porn... obviously you don't care enough to leave the site, or do anything more than bitch about it on the forum.  So you haven't exactly convinced me that it's as big a deal to you than you keep trying to make us think you do.  Don't talk the talk if you can't walk the walk!  I have more respect for the people who left the site over the issue AND the ones who stayed because they agreed with the ruling than I have for you.  At least they're not being hypocrites.


----------



## bearetic (Apr 24, 2009)

Cub porn has it's place on the site, namely, behind the filter. Behind closed doors, if you will. It's not being lauded here.


----------



## Takun (Apr 24, 2009)

Firehazard said:


> So, I came in late to this, but here's my take on things.
> 
> I consider "cub" and any other form of "virtual" (that is, not actual photographs of kids getting raped, of course) child porn to be pretty much in the same category as some of the "horror" movies we're seeing lately that are basically softcore snuff, created for people who enjoy watching people get decapitated, disemboweled, and otherwise made into Peoples 'N' Bits.  Namely, I would not call for a blanket banning of the material itself, but I consider the people who enjoy it to be seriously fucked up in the head, and I don't think we as a culture should be glorifying it.  For example, analagous to what's going on here, if I woke up one morning and found that _Saw XVII_ won Best Picture, I might be compelled to put a bullet in my head because I would realize I was living in a world I no longer wanted to be a part of.
> 
> ADDENDUM: To those who are still complaining that FurAffinity doesn't ban cub porn... obviously you don't care enough to leave the site, or do anything more than bitch about it on the forum.  So you haven't exactly convinced me that it's as big a deal to you than you keep trying to make us think you do.  Don't talk the talk if you can't walk the walk!  I have more respect for the people who left the site over the issue AND the ones who stayed because they agreed with the ruling than I have for you.  At least they're not being hypocrites.




wat.  I said if it was ILLEGAL then it SHOULDN'T be on here PERIOD.  If you can get arrested here for having it, then they shouldn't be hosting it because they are liable and unsuspecting users are too.


----------



## Lethe5683 (Apr 24, 2009)

SHENZEBO said:


> It's because everyone is a hypocrite when it comes to fetishes.
> 
> That's all I'm going to say. I give.



Not _everyone_.


----------



## bearetic (Apr 24, 2009)

Takumi_L said:


> wat.  I said if it was ILLEGAL then it SHOULDN'T be on here PERIOD.  If you can get arrested here for having it, then they shouldn't be hosting it because they are liable and unsuspecting users are too.



Seconded.


----------



## paxil rose (Apr 24, 2009)

UKtehwhitewolf said:


> This is the reason no furry has the right to yell "Fursecution!!1!" or attempt to convince people that not all furries are into porn or fetishes.  :|
> 
> It may be true that not all furries are into it, I know I'm not, but do we really have any ground to defend ourselves? Really?
> 
> * I'd like to bet if this was on a troll site or a troll started using it against a group of furries we'd all be going "OMG no! We're totally against it!! How dare you say such things!! D8<".*



And you'd win that bet.


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 25, 2009)

Lethe5683 said:


> Not _everyone_.


Yes, everyone.


----------



## TrystanSeven (Apr 25, 2009)

Shokuji said:


> Heh, maybe if you looked at the art/quality of the products maybe you'd understand that they are good. You don't like the content, sure, it's not something everyone likes just like how other people don't like piss, scat, vomit, blood, gore, vore, necro, unbirthing, cock transformation, latex, bondage, etc, etc, etc (there are -so- many). I say bravo for not getting caught up in 'high-and-mighty' "morals" and just focusing on it's qualities.



Agreed!


----------



## Sehelei (Apr 26, 2009)

Bunneh45 said:


> Honestly there is nothing wrong with pedophilia as long as you don't actually go and screw a kid. I don't think cartoons of this type of thing should be a problem.
> 
> But its on legally-shaky ground and it will cast furries on a bad light (not that they are in a good light to begin with), so please don't vote for these guys.
> 
> This would be an awesome prank /b/ could pull, though, mass-voting for it.



Dude, I actually agree with you. I didn't know anyone could have an opinion as similar to mine as this. I'm the same age as you and I'm not attracted to children in the least (quite the opposite), especially not porn featuring them, yuck. But seriously, if it's not real and doesn't hurt anyone then why do people have to discriminate so much? I guess it's because they can't jerk off at it. Seriously, if they're going to accuse people of being conservative for not liking gay stuff they might as well try to tolerate things they might not like as much too. It's not a crime being a pedophile, these people can't help it just as gay people can't turn straight. Hey, there are a lot of gay rapists as well, in my country a survey found that the number of raped men is almost the same as a number of raped women. Should we all start discriminating against them too?
I find it funny that whenever you defend some abnormal type of behaviour people immediately assume you're like that. Because, you're so open-minded and objective when you defend homosexuals but when you defend pedophiles then you're an evil child-rapist. I realize that morally sex with the same gender is definitively not the same as sex with children but seriously, no-one's talking about actual child abuse here but art which, being smut or porn is no less worthy than all those pictures of foxes shoving their bananas into eachother. And these people seriously think that going "OMG immoral u rapist!!!" at child porn will make pedophiles stop being pedophiles. There's no cure for pedophilia. I'm sure those people's lives would be a lot less screwed up if there were.


----------



## Istanbul (Apr 26, 2009)

I apologize for nothing.


----------



## Shadow (Apr 27, 2009)

Old groups are OLD.

EDIT: Actually, why don't we make the Lukewarm Furs?


----------



## Nemo (Apr 27, 2009)

Shadow said:


> Old groups are OLD.
> 
> EDIT: Actually, why don't we make the Lukewarm Furs?



Because you don't need a new group when the sides haven't changed.


----------



## Shadow (Apr 27, 2009)

Nemo said:


> Because you don't need a new group when the sides haven't changed.



But at least we'd have that in between temperature. ;D


----------



## Ashkihyena (Apr 27, 2009)

Guh, do not want.


----------



## bearetic (Apr 27, 2009)

/thread, new thread in it's place in the middle of May if CP wins.


----------



## TehSean (Apr 27, 2009)

..... Knotcast


----------



## Felicia Mertallis (Apr 27, 2009)

I think that unless its some national coverage of the Ursa awards that its not going to really matter much when it all comes down to it.

I mean, I voted for Softpaw, not because its cub porn, but because I am really impressed at the dedication, workmanship, and talent that went into making the magazine.
I have been following a couple of the artists in the magazine on Furaffinity for quite a long time and it was cool to see that they all collaborated themselves in a high quality magazine.
I just think its cool, since there aren't that many furry magazines that showcase multiple furry artists.


----------



## Ruko (Apr 28, 2009)

Takumi_L said:


> wat.  I said if it was ILLEGAL then it SHOULDN'T be on here PERIOD.  If you can get arrested here for having it, then they shouldn't be hosting it because they are liable and unsuspecting users are too.



Has anybody actually been arrested for having cub porn? Like an actual prosecution? The simpson's case in Australia is fairly well known by now, but I haven't heard of any similar cases in America. A quick google search for the actual legislation yields: 



> Title 					V 					 -  					Obscenity and Pornography
> 
> Subtitle A - Child Obscenity and Pornography Prevention
> 
> ...



To me, that reads as long as the drawing, cartoon, sculpture or painting is not of an actual child then it is not prohibited. Last I checked, furries don't actually exist. Seems this thread is making a mountain over something that is not currently an issue. 

Feel free to correct me if I'm interpreting that completely wrong.


----------



## Nishi (Apr 29, 2009)

I don't know anything about Ursa Major whatever awards, but if it's about anthropomorphic stuff, isn't it already representing furries? So having cubs as a part of it is just a part of it, not the whole, and the community that cares would already know about it.
Who cares, good for softpaw.


----------



## Zrcalo (Apr 29, 2009)

Cub porn doesnt bother me.
I dig gore/vore.
D: but that's hard to come by...
so ... I usually stick to Franken Fran.


----------



## bearetic (Apr 29, 2009)

Ruko said:


> Has anybody actually been arrested for having cub porn? Like an actual prosecution? The simpson's case in Australia is fairly well known by now, but I haven't heard of any similar cases in America. A quick google search for the actual legislation yields:
> 
> *snip*
> 
> ...



Well, the intent of the OP was to talk about how it would represent the fandom if this stuff were given an award, not about the legality of it. But, a shitstorm ensued, because that's the nature of this topic, and I don't blame anyone for touching on these issues.


----------



## Gavrill (Apr 29, 2009)

Who, other than furries, would even know what the Ursa Major Awards are?


----------



## bearetic (Apr 29, 2009)

ITS THE PRINCIPLE GOD DAMMIT D:<
But for srs, for real now, that's true (what you said) and I see it potentially just blowing over unless people make a big what to do about it (like I did by starting this thread! YAY)
Don't do drugs, kids.


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> Who, other than furries, would even know what the Ursa Major Awards are?



Who, other than SciFi fans, ever knew what the Hugos or the Nebulaes were during their first decade or two, until SciFi started attaining some credibility in the mainstream?


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> So, say Blotch. Blotch makes porn. Does that mean they're not artists? No, it means they draw porn, which is art. The hypocrisy in this thread astounds me. If your favorite artist drew porn, would that make it not art?



But why would anyone nominate his porn if he has _non_-porn art to nominate?

The only time porn should be considered is if there's a specific category for it.

The entire idea of the awards in the first place was to find and spotlight the very best anthropomorphic art published in any given year, with an eye towards moving the public eye _away _from the cheesy, the sleazy and the blatantly pornographic.

Nominating pornographic material tends to defeat the purpose.


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

cpam said:


> Nominating pornographic material tends to defeat the purpose.


No, not rly. If it's good artistically, I would hope people would be mature enough to look past the the pornographic material and say "Hey, this art is pretty good".


----------



## south syde dobe (May 23, 2009)

NO DAMN IT, NO... D:


----------



## Ikrit (May 23, 2009)

some cub art is cute :3

when they are clean...


----------



## south syde dobe (May 23, 2009)

lazyredhead said:


> some cub art is cute :3
> 
> when they are clean...


 

Dude I doubt anything from a magazine named softpaw is going to be anything but not clean D:


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

If it were normal porn, no one would be complaining. :V


----------



## Ikrit (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> If it were normal porn, no one would be complaining. :V


but this is very very different!!!!!

they are under age.


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

lazyredhead said:


> but this is very very different!!!!!
> 
> they are under age.


So? :V


----------



## CaptainCool (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> No, not rly. If it's good artistically, I would hope people would be mature enough to look past the the pornographic material and say "Hey, this art is pretty good".



my point exactly^^ i dont exactly know those comics (just seen some preview stuff) but since inuki is one of the artists delivering the content (god i love her style X3) i just presume that the overall quality is pretty neat. i wouldnt buy it because its just not my thing but you are right, everyone should look beyond that disturbing pornographic aspect


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> No, not rly. If it's good artistically, I would hope people would be mature enough to look past the the pornographic material and say "Hey, this art is pretty good".



Yes, really.  Award committees generally set up rules and conditions beforehand as to what is acceptable and as to what could or should be considered.  If any material does not meet that specific criteria, then it is not eligible.  It doesn't matter how pretty it is or how technically proficient it might be.  If it doesn't fit the criteria, if it doesn't suit the purposes of the intent of the award, then it is not acceptable.

And that's true of any award in any field.


----------



## Trpdwarf (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> If it were normal porn, no one would be complaining. :V



Amongst the already growing list of problems the furry fandom has, the last thing we need is to have Cub Porn (the existence of it) shoved to the surface by having it win an award.

That's going to be a bad hit to the fandom. Let that get out and become public to the media. Then you will begin to have bigger problems because, while we can easily deny and debunk the idea that all fur-suiters have sex in costume, it's going to be harder to justify having porn of underage characters.


----------



## Ikrit (May 23, 2009)

well they lost.


----------



## CaptainCool (May 23, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Amongst the already growing list of problems the furry fandom has, the last thing we need is to have Cub Porn (the existence of it) shoved to the surface by having it win an award.
> 
> That's going to be a bad hit to the fandom. Let that get out and become public to the media. Then you will begin to have bigger problems because, while we can easily deny and debunk the idea that all fur-suiters have sex in costume, it's going to be harder to justify having porn of underage characters.



that IS a problem but does the award really draw that much media attention to itself?
but you are right, most people arent that open minded and everyone else who finds it will probably be terrified by the idea of a group that has award winning child pornography.



lazyredhead said:


> well they lost.



/threat?


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

CaptainCool said:


> that IS a problem but does the award really draw that much media attention to itself?



I haven't looked this year, but in the past the announcements of the awards have been picked up by noteworthy SF blogs, such as Locus, where they would be viewed by a wider range of readers and media-savvy contributors.

The Ursas aren't yet in the same general public eye the way the Hugos or the Nebulas are, but the goal is to someday get there.  I don't think getting there with questionable baggage is in its interests.


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Amongst the already growing list of problems the furry fandom has, the last thing we need is to have Cub Porn (the existence of it) shoved to the surface by having it win an award.
> 
> That's going to be a bad hit to the fandom. Let that get out and become public to the media. Then you will begin to have bigger problems because, while we can easily deny and debunk the idea that all fur-suiters have sex in costume, it's going to be harder to justify having porn of underage characters.


Furry already has either a bad rep or a "what the hell is that" rep. I'm in the apathetic group.


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> Furry already has either a bad rep or a "what the hell is that" rep.



All the more reason _not _to contribute to that view.


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

cpam said:


> All the more reason _not _to contribute to that view.


You do know that as soon as you enter the fandom that dog dicks are shoved in your face from every angle, right?

It will only get worse, trust me.


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

Also; does anyone remember in AMV Hell 0 how half the porn clips featured underage characters? What a riot :V


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> You do know that as soon as you enter the fandom that dog dicks are shoved in your face from every angle, right?
> 
> It will only get worse, trust me.



I entered the fandom long _before _it ever got that way, and in spite of people's perceptions it's not like that in every corner of the fandom.  It's primarily in the most publicly viewable venues, such as online archives where, out of fear of promoting censorship, instead allowed posting without restraint, rules or guidance.

It will only get worse if it's _allowed _to get worse.  Trust me on _that_.


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

At any rate, I'm dropping out of the debate. Cub art, to me, has just as much artistic merit as any other art, pornographic or otherwise. That's all I gots to say.


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> At any rate, I'm dropping out of the debate. Cub art, to me, has just as much artistic merit as any other art, pornographic or otherwise. That's all I gots to say.



You certainly may if you wish.

But cub art has _no _merit whatsoever.


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

cpam said:


> You certainly may if you wish.
> 
> But cub art has _no _merit whatsoever.


Even if it's clean? I can't see someone turning up their nose to something like _Lolita_ because of the content, considering how amazing the writing is.

Edit: Also that's very petty of you to scoff at art that an artist has obviously put more effort into what they do than you have into this whole debate.


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> Even if it's clean? I can't see someone turning up their nose to something like _Lolita_ because of the content, considering how amazing the writing is.
> 
> Edit: Also that's very petty of you to scoff at art that an artist has obviously put more effort into what they do than you have into this whole debate.



Because *Lolita *_wasn't_ a pornographic tale, but a story about a man obsessed with underage girls.  The difference is that it doesn't go into any gory, explicit sexual details, but instead explores the man and his compulsions and the repercussions of those compulsions.

Cub art has no goal other than to titillate those with pedophilia leanings, without concern for any artistic merits, other than to make it look pretty and attractive.

There's no way you can compare the two with any honesty.


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

Well I think fat fur pics are disgusting, but you don't see me trying to discount their artistic merit. _I'm _sorry, but art doesn't work that way.


----------



## Trpdwarf (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> You do know that as soon as you enter the fandom that dog dicks are shoved in your face from every angle, right?
> 
> It will only get worse, trust me.



That's not true. When I entered the fandom it was not shoved into may face or that of my best friend who joined the fandom about two years back. In fact only one that I know of around 25 furries ever gave me an issue. 

You internet furries, this is talking to the general (not to you Shenzi) need to wake up and realize that your expriences with the fandom online do not mirror the fandom in real life. Of course there is going to be some disturbing shit and "What the hell" going on online, because that's the nature of the internet. Go to /b/ and you find the same thing.

But I've met furs at meets, at anime cons, and at least one fur con...and never had a problem with the fetish stuff or the porn....just because some of you have an experience where it's all porn, and dicks, and sex, does not mean it is the same for the rest of us.


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> But I've met furs at meets, at anime cons, and at least one fur con...and never had a problem with the fetish stuff or the porn....just because some of you have an experience where it's all porn, and dicks, and sex, does not mean it is the same for the rest of us.


I realize that. I've seen plenty of non-sexual furry art. I've seen plenty of non-sexual anime art. And the people at cons are usually smart enough to keep their fetishes under lock and key (forgive the pun). I admit, it was not the smartest thing for Softpaw to do if they publish to non-furs, but the likelihood of a random non-fur wanting to know the Softpaw art awards is rather low.


----------



## Barnem (May 23, 2009)

For reference: http://psp.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/28/6/724 (it's only the abstract).

However, the results are what's important. Arousal leads to more arousal. So if you fapped to cub porn, you are more likely to actualy molest a child, same as if you read a lot of rape you are more inclined to rape. Please note that this is PROBABILISTIC, not DETERMINISTIC. You're not going to read one comic and go rape a child or murder someone. 

But on topic, I don't really care what the subject of the piece was, as long it was of high quality. Because that's what the judges are looking at. "Does this work show skill and is of high production value?" I don't agree with the content, but I'll fight to the bone to say that it's art if it was any good.


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> Well I think fat fur pics are disgusting, but you don't see me trying to discount their artistic merit. _I'm _sorry, but art doesn't work that way.



Whether fat fur pics have any artistic merits is going to be a different issue.  They at least have the merit of not promoting unhealthy interests in underage children.

I'll only say that, in general, the more an artform panders to a prurient interest, the less it is interested in being art; it's only function is to pander.


----------



## Barnem (May 23, 2009)

cpam said:


> Whether fat fur pics have any artistic merits is going to be a different issue.  They at least have the merit of not promoting unhealthy interests in underage children.
> 
> I'll only say that, in general, the more an artform panders to a prurient interest, the less it is interested in being art; it's only function is to pander.



Art _is_ pandering, just dressed up with flowers and vases.


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

cpam said:


> promoting unhealthy interests in underage children.


Like with furry and bestiality :V


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (May 23, 2009)

> Whether fat fur pics have any artistic merits is going to be a different issue. They at least have the merit of not promoting unhealthy interests in underage children.



Since when was being fat healthy? Fat is bad. It's an unhealthy state of being that places a lot of extra stress on you body and usually leads to people dying early and having a decreased quality of life.


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Barnem said:


> Art _is_ pandering, just dressed up with flowers and vases.



To pander is to act as an agent for prurient gratification; as in, to pimp.

How does art pander, outside of the specific cases we're discussing?


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

I think someone is just raging over porn they don't have to look at in the first place. :V


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> Like with furry and bestiality :V



You need to be a little more specefic here.  Do you mean, "as in the perceived relationship between furry and bestiality"?


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

cpam said:


> You need to be a little more specefic here.  Do you mean, "as in the perceived relationship between furry and bestiality"?


I mean, if cub = child rape, then obviously guro = chopping your balls off. Obviously.

Just comparing.


----------



## Trpdwarf (May 23, 2009)

Rakuen Growlithe said:


> Since when was being fat healthy? Fat is bad. It's an unhealthy state of being that places a lot of extra stress on you body and usually leads to people dying early and having a decreased quality of life.



Not all fat in your body is bad. It's not bad to have some fat. It's not bad to have some extra weight. It's when you let it get to the point where it adversely affects your health, that is when it gets bad.


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Rakuen Growlithe said:


> Since when was being fat healthy? Fat is bad. It's an unhealthy state of being that places a lot of extra stress on you body and usually leads to people dying early and having a decreased quality of life.



Wrong sense of the word, 'healthy'.  We're speaking of unhealthy sexual compulsions.  The fat furry thing may very well involve unhealthy inclinations towards one's physical health, but that's a different issue.  Nothing to do with the general subject.


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> I think someone is just raging over porn they don't have to look at in the first place. :V



Or maybe some folks are making too light of it, not being able to grasp (or care about) any potentially larger concerns that could derive from it.


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

cpam said:


> Or maybe some folks are making too light of it, not being able to grasp (or care about) any potentially larger concerns that could derive from it.


Dog dicks = bestiality. OBVIOUSLY :V


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> I mean, if cub = child rape, then obviously guro = chopping your balls off. Obviously.
> 
> Just comparing.



And overstating.

Cub does not equal child rape.  But it does encourage an unhealthy interest towards children, as does any form of child pornography; that in turn _could _lead to child rape.  Not every possessor of pedophilia is a molester, but all molesters possess pedophilia.

And, yes, the same equation then holds true for guro.


----------



## Trpdwarf (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> I mean, if cub = child rape, then obviously guro = chopping your balls off. Obviously.
> 
> Just comparing.



Child porn can lead to acting upon impulses(it can also lead to not acting). And, sorry Shenzi but no matter how you look at it, and no matter how much you want to admit it, Cub Porn is child porn, sorry, but that is what it is.

It's a softer version.


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Child porn can lead to acting upon impulses(it can also lead to not acting). And, sorry Shenzi but no matter how you look at it, and no matter how much you want to admit it, Cub Porn is child porn, sorry, but that is what it is.
> 
> It's a softer version.


And furry porn is bestiality, yes, I know.

Just softer.

Yeah, I'm done. Brb raping children and dogs.


----------



## Trpdwarf (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> Dog dicks = bestiality. OBVIOUSLY :V



Bestiality deals with non anthropomorphic animals, real animals, not fictional half animal half humans, that have sentience and laws of consent apply.

That is why Feral Porn is highly questionable.

Don't bring it up. Not relevant. Furry anthro animals are nothing more than what would happen if all the animals followed our evolution line, then suddenly a cat and a dog is not a diff species, but a diff race.


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> Dog dicks = bestiality. OBVIOUSLY :V



That gets into a really shady territory that I don't know if I could properly address.  The thought that comes to my mind, was that if it _didn't_ have a bestiality connection, then _why _are they _dog _dicks?

More importantly, non-Furs see this and _automatically _make that mental jump.  What is there to convince them otherwise, that would have as much visual and emotive impact?

But this is a separate issue, and not the topic at hand.


----------



## Rakuen Growlithe (May 23, 2009)

cub porn is fantasy art and is just as likely to makes someone do actual sexual acts with a child as ordinary furry porn is to make someone start bestiality.


----------



## Trpdwarf (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> And furry porn is bestiality, yes, I know.
> 
> Just softer.
> 
> Yeah, I'm done. Brb raping children and dogs.



Only feral porn is bestiality. Please calm down and think about what you are saying. You are beginning to become irrational.


----------



## Gavrill (May 23, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> Bestiality deals with non anthropomorphic animals, real animals, not fictional half animal half humans, that have sentience and laws of consent apply.
> 
> That is why Feral Porn is highly questionable.
> 
> Don't bring it up. Not relevant. Furry anthro animals are nothing more than what would happen if all the animals followed our evolution line, then suddenly a cat and a dog is not a diff species, but a diff race.





cpam said:


> That gets into a really shady territory that I don't know if I could properly address.  The thought that comes to my mind, was that if it _didn't_ have a bestiality connection, then _why _are they _dog _dicks?
> 
> More importantly, non-Furs see this and _automatically _make that mental jump.  What is there to convince them otherwise, that would have as much visual and emotive impact?
> 
> But this is a separate issue, and not the topic at hand.



Heh, notice how the squirming starts. :3

Oh, I am calm. Just tired of bullshit hypocrisy.


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Rakuen Growlithe said:


> cub porn is fantasy art and is just as likely to makes someone do actual sexual acts with a child as ordinary furry porn is to make someone start bestiality.



A false equation.  Go back to what I previously posted: pedophilia -- and make no mistake, cub art is just that, given softer texture -- encourages and justifies the impulse.  Owning pedophilia does not turn one into a molester, but all molesters own pedophilia.

The connections between furry porn and bestiality are far more tenuous, given that zoophiles generally consider furries to be 'wanna-be's'.


----------



## Trpdwarf (May 23, 2009)

Shenzebo said:


> Heh, notice how the squirming starts. :3
> 
> Oh, I am calm. Just tired of bullshit hypocrisy.



You call that squirming? We're trying to get you to stop using illogic, and be more rational.

Look it's fine and all if you a soft version of kiddie porn...just admit what it is. Same goes for feral porn...it's a close line to bestiality. Failfailing and trying to drag in irrelevent other subjects and accusing them of being things they are not does not help your argument.

The subject of this thread though is not wether or not cub porn is right or wrong, but if it really should get a nomination. Considering what it can be considered, the answer is no. If you don't like it, oh well. It's sort of like Weed, smoking it is illegal. Possessing it is illegal. But if you have it, it's no real problem because it really hurts nobody, until flaunt and gain police attention. Then you might end up with a raid and sometimes those can turn violent.

If you have cub-porn, look it can and very may well be classified as child porn, and therefore illegal to own. If you don't flaunt it everywhere there is no problem. A nomination of cub porn is flaunting it...and we don't need groups starting to flaunt their fetish's. That belongs, and I think we all agree or should, as a more private thing.

Nominating Cub Porn is like starting a festival for weed smokers. You are just asking for trouble.


----------



## Grimfang (May 23, 2009)

So many red herrings and point-in-analogies. Neither cub nor furry porn are going to be seen as non-abhorrent by most, but does porn usually get nominated at all for the Ursa Major Awards? If not, what is so absurd about having a strongly negative opinion about the nomination of potentially pedophillic _and_ zoophilic work?

I am also curious as to the reasoning behind arguing that a massively generalized area of porn may lead to zoophilia, if fantasizing about depicted sexual situations with children, furry or not, increases the likelihood of child molestations. Within "furry porn", there's feral, cub, humans with cat ears, dinosaurs, digimon, etc. I won't claim that everything listed isn't somehow depraved or strange, but it's not quite on the same level as you're arguing it to be. Exveemon never bridged the associations of "sexy" and "my dog".


----------



## Trpdwarf (May 23, 2009)

> Exveemon never bridged the associations of "sexy" and "my dog".


Didn't stop Ebon Lupis, or Dal-Husky....or Java. All of which had galleries of Feral Porn....(If I mod asks me too I will willingly take out those names but...it's like with Wolfee...it cannot be helped what is true or what used to have oodles of evidence).

EDIT: May as well bring up this: One of the furries I used to hang out with, let us just say a family member(parent) was caught with kiddie porn on the work computer....but the furrie who is the grown up child of the pedophile caught, used to write in ernest yiffy stories involving young cub fur characters, having sex with each other, and or siblings masturbating each other. Interesting, huh? True story too. Take that as you will but I think much was going on in the family and those trashy stories written were an outlet to justify going ons. Many of those stories were disturbing, he dwelled on the idea of children having sex, or entire villages having sex in a orgy without care or worry to what gender, age, or blood relation is.

The object of that true story, is that this person probably went through abuse in that family, this I am sure of due to various problems that I have seen manifest....and the cub porn if this person dwells on it too much along with the stories...it could play upon what the person went through and turn the person into what the parent was. That's not settling. I stopped hanging out with that person actually.

But um...it's probably for the best stuff like this is not pushed out into the open, cub porn or feral porn for that matter, due to the way people can look at it and the way it can be used/misused.


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Trpdwarf said:


> You call that squirming? We're trying to get you to stop using illogic, and be more rational.
> 
> Look it's fine and all if you a soft version of kiddie porn...just admit what it is. Same goes for feral porn...it's a close line to bestiality. Failfailing and trying to drag in irrelevent other subjects and accusing them of being things they are not does not help your argument.
> 
> ...



I like you.  You're one of the most common-sensible people I've run across in a while.


----------



## cpam (May 23, 2009)

Beef Ramen said:


> So many red herrings and point-in-analogies. Neither cub nor furry porn are going to be seen as non-abhorrent by most, but does porn usually get nominated at all for the Ursa Major Awards?



It does not.  This was an aberration, caused by a loophole in the nomination process.  No one expected that something like Softpaw would ever get nominated (it existed on a very thin line between what was allowable and what wasn't according to the nomination regs) and once the nominations were in, the committee didn't feel that they could retroactively cut it from the list.

Expect that loophole to be eliminated for next year's nominations.


----------



## Shadowwolf (May 24, 2009)

The reason the majority of furries think this stuff is okay is because the majority of furries are royally messed up in the head.

And they ADMIT to it.


----------



## Shadow (May 24, 2009)

Not a fan.


----------



## Chuong Cho Soi (Jun 27, 2009)

Shit like this pisses me off because not only does it give the fandom a bad image, this discourages the teen furs from joining the fandom and encouraging pedophiles and sick fucks to join the fandom. FUCK! I am fucking furious at those furverts! I wished they yiff in hell for trying to damage people's childhood and innocence!


----------



## moonchylde (Jun 27, 2009)

Necro, in before lock. Whee.


----------



## LizardKing (Jun 28, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> Shit like this pisses me off because not only does it give the fandom a bad image, this discourages the teen furs from joining the fandom and encouraging pedophiles and sick fucks to join the fandom. FUCK! I am fucking furious at those furverts! I wished they yiff in hell for trying to damage people's childhood and innocence!



Damn it I hate this stuff so I'll bump a 2 month old thread so people can read it again! Aaargh! Rage!


----------



## ~secret~ (Jun 28, 2009)

I dont care about any of this anymore. At 1:15AM last night I realised I dont give a crap about things that dont affect me in any way.


----------



## Shadow (Jun 28, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> Shit like this pisses me off because not only does it give the fandom a bad image, this discourages the teen furs from joining the fandom and encouraging pedophiles and sick fucks to join the fandom. FUCK! I am fucking furious at those furverts! I wished they yiff in hell for trying to damage people's childhood and innocence!



Way to be a necromancer by the way. :/


----------



## Jashwa (Jun 28, 2009)

Chuong Cho Soi said:


> Shit like this pisses me off because not only does it give the fandom a bad image, this discourages the teen furs from joining the fandom and encouraging pedophiles and sick fucks to join the fandom. FUCK! I am fucking furious at those furverts! I wished they yiff in hell for trying to damage people's childhood and innocence!


 Dates, man, dates!  Just let the thread RIP .


----------



## cpam (Jun 28, 2009)

Jashwa said:


> Dates, man, dates!  Just let the thread RIP .



There's a shelf-life to expressing opinions!?


----------



## Jashwa (Jun 28, 2009)

cpam said:


> There's a shelf-life to expressing opinions!?


 No, but there is a shelf-life on drawn out topics that have already been discussed.


----------



## Aden (Jun 28, 2009)

cpam said:


> There's a shelf-life to expressing opinions!?



It's bad form. Make a new topic and express your opinion.


----------



## jcfynx (Jun 28, 2009)

Shadow said:


> Way to be a necromancer by the way. :/



Why don't we keep bumping the thread about it instead of just telling him


----------



## Jashwa (Jun 28, 2009)

jcfynx said:


> Why don't we keep bumping the thread about it instead of just telling him


 Post count +1.  If we dont' keep it right at the top, then the mods might miss it and this great tradgedy could happen in the future.  We're merely assuring it's lock and destruction


----------



## Ozriel (Jun 28, 2009)

To the person who has "Rebirth", stop rezzing. 
Remove "rebirth" from your hotkey bar.


----------



## Gavrill (Jun 28, 2009)

Oh, memories. How I wish they'd bury themselves again.


----------



## cpam (Jun 28, 2009)

Aden said:


> It's bad form.



Against a sea of bad form, of arrogance, casual cruelty, sniping, cyberbullying and just plain poor etiquette -- all of the behaviors that exist within the internet at large -- where it would probably be the _least _offensive of all bad forms.


----------



## Aden (Jun 28, 2009)

cpam said:


> Against a sea of bad form, of arrogance, casual cruelty, sniping, cyberbullying and just plain poor etiquette -- all of the behaviors that exist within the internet at large -- where it would probably be the _least _offensive of all bad forms.



Sooooo you're just going to say that it's okay because other people do more offensive things instead of taking that one little step to make the place even just a bit better. Gotcha. :V


----------



## cpam (Jun 28, 2009)

Aden said:


> Sooooo you're just going to say that it's okay because other people do more offensive things instead of taking that one little step to make the place even just a bit better. Gotcha. :V



No, I was just saying that all things being equal, there was too much fussin' about somebody else's fussin' -- and that it be better that he without sin, etcetera etcetera...


----------



## Shadow (Jun 28, 2009)

jcfynx said:


> Why don't we keep bumping the thread about it instead of just telling him



That's ironic, since you did just that. |D


----------

