# Is crappy human porn accepted?



## Hawkcon (Jan 20, 2010)

For the last two days I've been seeing a few profiles on the Main site that show only human, and VERY crappy renditions at that, porn. Like: Toph from Avatar: The Last Airbender, still as a young girl, and as a futa. Even a naked Misty from Pokemon with only a domo-... getting kinda illicit here.... and done horribly.

I personally have nothing against someone posting human porn-art on here as long as they don't do it in ALL of their art on the Main site. But to me, it still makes our site seem... more like a porn site to the human media.

My big question: Is crappy human-porn art accepted? 

if need be, I'll privately link an admin the profile.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 20, 2010)

Hawkcon said:


> For the last two days I've been seeing a few profiles on the Main site that show only human, and VERY crappy renditions at that, porn. Like: Toph from Avatar: The Last Airbender, still as a young girl, and as a futa. Even a naked Misty from Pokemon with only a domo-... getting kinda illicit here.... and done horribly.
> 
> I personally have nothing against someone posting human porn-art on here as long as they don't do it in ALL of their art on the Main site. But to me, it still makes our site seem... more like a porn site to the human media.
> 
> ...


Actually, it is. Cry some more.


----------



## yiffytimesnews (Jan 20, 2010)

I have seen some work that honestly could have been done by a 3 year old with a crayon...and this was on a pay site.


----------



## Hawkcon (Jan 20, 2010)

I would've thought that people doing such crappy porn would have been hit with a hammer until they either died or got better. Especially human porn... I've rarely ever felt this stupid and... let's just say I felt like my genatalia were retreating at my viewing such crap.
well... I guess if this topic is no longer valid for an admin to read, I might as well take the subject to the art corner where I can cry about it without disturbing too many others except to show them and let them make and poke fun privately at the person's works in a small clique... 
ciao!


----------



## Ozriel (Jan 20, 2010)

Hawkcon said:


> I would've thought that people doing such crappy porn would have been hit with a hammer until they either died or got better. Especially human porn... I've rarely ever felt this stupid and... let's just say I felt like my genatalia were retreating at my viewing such crap.



Wait...you do realize that furries create crappy porn too, right? With the vertical vaginas, downward erections, etc...etc..Why are you just picking on the human stuff?


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 20, 2010)

Hawkcon said:


> I would've thought that people doing such crappy porn would have been hit with a hammer until they either died or got better. Especially human porn... I've rarely ever felt this stupid and... let's just say I felt like my genatalia were retreating at my viewing such crap.
> well... I guess if this topic is no longer valid for an admin to read, I might as well take the subject to the art corner where I can cry about it without disturbing too many others except to show them and let them make and poke fun privately at the person's works in a small clique...
> ciao!


Still the wrong place for that.
http://community.livejournal.com/wtf_fa/
^ Go there, and never bother us again.


----------



## Taasla (Jan 20, 2010)

Well, there's a ton of crappy furry porn, too.

So are we only letting in the "good" human porn?  Who is gonna judge that?


----------



## AshleyAshes (Jan 20, 2010)

Yes, FurAffnity exists for porn artists from DeviantArt to post their porn which they arn't allowed to post there.


----------



## Aden (Jan 20, 2010)

It'll be freezing in hell before FA implements any sort of quality control.


----------



## quayza (Jan 20, 2010)

There a lot of crappy everything now a days.


----------



## Smelge (Jan 20, 2010)

Aden said:


> It'll be freezing in hell before FA implements any sort of quality control.



There'd be no-one left.


----------



## LizardKing (Jan 20, 2010)

Aden said:


> It'll be freezing in hell before FA implements any sort of quality control.



And it'll be never be freezing from all the furfags yiffing there.


----------



## Aden (Jan 20, 2010)

Voidrunners said:


> There'd be no-one left.



I'm okay with this


----------



## mapdark (Jan 20, 2010)

Voidrunners said:


> There'd be no-one left.



Well there wouldn't be many people left that's for sure .. but I'm AWRIGHT with this.


----------



## Ratte (Jan 20, 2010)

you can always lower your standards like the rest of us :V


----------



## mapdark (Jan 20, 2010)

pfft.. Lower standards?

I can't wait for the day there'll be a filter to cut out artists that you don't wanna see in the browse section. I'll go crazy with the filter button when that happens.


----------



## Ratte (Jan 20, 2010)

do want


----------



## Dragoneer (Jan 20, 2010)

It is. For the moment.


----------



## Hawkcon (Jan 20, 2010)

For a few of ya who asked why I was bashing crappy human porn on FA... it's like asking you, of the anime fandom, this question: Would you prefer a well-drawn picture of Toph(Avatar the Last Air Bender) making love to a mole-creature? or would you prefer a crap-drawn Toph, who is just standing, there in little more than a powerpuff undersized sleep-dress?

As a furry, and a guy who's icon says :"If there's no porn, I DON'T care!" I would totally go for the one where she's well-drawn and doing some sexual acts with a beast. Preferably an anthropomorphic... 

Why I don't bash the REALLY crappy furry porn, well... it's got a furry, right? A fursona who's not been copyrighted to a company or artist except it's own. 

For now, signing off,
Hawk

P.S.: if you would like to continue this debate with me, you're more than welcome to do it privately with me on YIM and/or AIM. 
light_briareos is my Y-ID. 
lightbriareos is my AIM.


----------



## Dragoneer (Jan 20, 2010)

Hawkcon said:


> For a few of ya who asked why I was bashing crappy human porn on FA... it's like asking you, of the anime fandom, this question: Would you prefer a well-drawn picture of Toph(Avatar the Last Air Bender) making love to a mole-creature? or would you prefer a crap-drawn Toph, who is just standing, there in little more than a powerpuff undersized sleep-dress?


There are some significant changes coming soon to the AUP that specifically address things like this (to some degree). Not so much entirely on a "quality" perspective, per se. We'll explain more in the rules update.


----------



## Hawkcon (Jan 20, 2010)

Dragoneer said:


> There are some significant changes coming soon to the AUP that specifically address things like this (to some degree). Not so much entirely on a "quality" perspective, per se. We'll explain more in the rules update.



cant wait to see it!


----------



## AshleyAshes (Jan 20, 2010)

Hawkcon said:


> cant wait to see it!


 
Me either, but mostly for the entertainment of 'The FurAffinity Human Vs Furry Civil War'.


----------



## Aden (Jan 20, 2010)

Dragoneer said:


> There are some significant changes coming soon to the AUP that specifically address things like this (to some degree). Not so much entirely on a "quality" perspective, per se. We'll explain more in the rules update.



I'd really enjoy some measure of quality control. I know it's never going to happen (it's a rather arbitrary thing, and many many people would baaww), but I can dream.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 20, 2010)

Requesting an IP ban on the OP.


----------



## InuAkiko (Jan 21, 2010)

Dragoneer said:


> There are some significant changes coming soon to the AUP that specifically address things like this (to some degree). Not so much entirely on a "quality" perspective, per se. We'll explain more in the rules update.



thank youuu

i dont care that its human, i care that people go and use FA as a dumping ground just cause DA said it aint okay. 
i have a SLIGHTLY higher tolerence for shitty fur art cause they are involved in the fandom that FA is predominately intended for.


----------



## Smelge (Jan 21, 2010)

Oh god yes, this is perfect...

So, right, if there is liable to be changes as to humans being excluded from art on this site, where do you sit people who are entirely human except for maybe ears. Thats not really human but could fall into either category. 

Then theres the above mentioned quality controlol thing.

People have to improve, but as is seen time and again, artists that are improving get ignored for a terrible bit of porn, where in a straight-up comparison, the porn would lose.

Having a rating system would be difficult, you could do a system similar to Youtube and it's stars, but pictures would get 5* all the time if it's a popular artist, has lots of friends or porn of any quality. You could do a rating system so you can vote for Art, style and other aspects, but again that could be abused to make crappy artists look good.

What might work is every picture can be rated out of 5, but each user can only hand out say 15 stars in a 24hr period. That way people actually have to think about where they're firing their stars, or if an artist mass-uploads, you have to figure out which ones you actually want recognition to go to, rather than bumming them all.

Or something.

Failing that, troll the bad porn artists, find where they live and set fire to their doormats.


----------



## Korex (Jan 21, 2010)

I staying in between..but i seem to be leaning on the negative side.


----------



## Taasla (Jan 21, 2010)

But, why?  I can think of at least two popular FA artists who do pretty much nothing but human porn.  They get to stay, but someone with less skill has to leave?

Well hell.


----------



## zesty (Jan 21, 2010)

I've seen wayyyyyyy more crappy furry porn on this site than I have human.  I don't see what the issue is.  I would love some quality control, but it seems like a very subjective thing.  People could get left out who honestly want to come here for help or critique. (which I know is few and far between, but still..)


----------



## TehSean (Jan 21, 2010)

Yes


----------



## PKBitchGirl (Jan 21, 2010)

So, you're banning human art?

What about art of humans fucking furries?


----------



## Nightingalle (Jan 21, 2010)

PKBitchGirl said:


> So, you're banning human art?
> 
> What about art of humans fucking furries?



I'm pretty sure no one said there's going to be a ban on human art :U 

If you're referring to : 





Dragoneer said:


> There are some significant changes coming soon to the AUP that specifically address things like this (to some degree). Not so much entirely on a "quality" perspective, per se. We'll explain more in the rules update.



I think it was intended to be more of a notion that quality of all art will be under review, not that human art would be banned.  

I can only imagine a ban of human art being a very, very bad move for a website that has built itself on accepting all forms of art, a website that is for 'furries' to be together in a community setting and upload art regardless of content (human or furry or whatever else).


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 21, 2010)

PKBitchGirl said:


> So, you're banning human art?


I don't think anyone's banning human art outright. The OP's just retarded.

I could be wrong, though. 'Neer _was_ vague in a very specific way about that.



> What about art of humans fucking furries?


Most likely, furries'll bitch about the humans making their dicks go limp, but (hopefully) nobody whose opinion matters will give a damn. In other words, no change.


----------



## Nightingalle (Jan 21, 2010)

I'd actually be highly amused and offended all at once if human art was banned while cub porn / beastiality is still allowed :'D


----------



## 2-Tailed Taymon (Jan 21, 2010)

Leave the Hentai to HentaiFoundry >.<*  Yiff is for FurAffinity. and the porn OFF THE INTERNET.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 21, 2010)

MeisuWeasel said:


> Leave the Hentai to HentaiFoundry >.<*  Yiff is for FurAffinity. and the porn OFF THE INTERNET.


The Internet is for porn, so you're an even bigger moron than the OP right there. Take a bow, sparky.


----------



## 2-Tailed Taymon (Jan 21, 2010)

Rigor Sardonicus said:


> The Internet is for porn, so you're an even bigger moron than the OP right there. Take a bow, sparky.


 

I'm a moron, and I admit it. But I just hate human nudity stuff. Only yiff & hentai for me.


----------



## Nightingalle (Jan 21, 2010)

MeisuWeasel said:


> I'm a moron, and I admit it. But I just hate human nudity stuff. Only yiff & hentai for me.



You know you are human and I assume you shower (am I assuming too much?) and thus are nude.  GASP NO SAY IT AINT SO.


----------



## 2-Tailed Taymon (Jan 21, 2010)

KoiFishSushi said:


> You know you are human and I assume you shower (am I assuming too much?) and thus are nude. GASP NO SAY IT AINT SO.


 

I ain't human. Call me crazy, but yeah. Don't mess with Demonkin.


----------



## Nightingalle (Jan 21, 2010)

MeisuWeasel said:


> I ain't human. Call me crazy, but yeah. Don't mess with Demonkin.



Oh god, I needed a good laugh today.  Thank you.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 21, 2010)

MeisuWeasel said:


> I'm a moron, and I admit it. But I just hate human nudity stuff. Only yiff & hentai for me.


You must die a little inside every time you take a shower.


----------



## 2-Tailed Taymon (Jan 21, 2010)

Rigor Sardonicus said:


> You must die a little inside every time you take a shower.


 

I've been dead inside for years.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 21, 2010)

MeisuWeasel said:


> I've been dead inside for years.


I think what you're trying to say here is CRAAAAAAAAAAAAAWLIIIIIING IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN MYYYYYYY SKIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNN


----------



## 2-Tailed Taymon (Jan 21, 2010)

Rigor Sardonicus said:


> I think what you're trying to say here is CRAAAAAAAAAAAAAWLIIIIIING IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIN MYYYYYYY FUUUURRRRRR


 

Yeah, exactly >.>*


----------



## Aden (Jan 21, 2010)

MeisuWeasel said:


> Yeah, exactly >.>*



...are you...real?


----------



## 2-Tailed Taymon (Jan 21, 2010)

Aden said:


> ...are you...real?


 

Reality is trivial. So no, I'm just a figment of your imagination.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 21, 2010)

MeisuWeasel said:


> Yeah, exactly >.>*


Wanna buy a suicide kit? $15 each o3o


----------



## Nightingalle (Jan 21, 2010)

Ok I think this thread has been derailed enough LOL.  However amusing it is to poke fun at a self proclaimed narutard.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 21, 2010)

KoiFishSushi said:


> Ok I think this thread has been derailed enough LOL.  However amusing it is to poke fun at a self proclaimed narutard.


Don't forget, it also think's it's a demon :V


----------



## 2-Tailed Taymon (Jan 21, 2010)

Rigor Sardonicus said:


> Don't forget, it also think's it's a demon :V


 

You guys honestly amuse me. I should brought popcorn and a slushie.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 21, 2010)

MeisuWeasel said:


> You guys honestly amuse me. I should brought popcorn and a slushie.


Don't you have some hand signs to practice or something?


----------



## Whitenoise (Jan 21, 2010)

I clicked on this thread thinking it would be funny but it isn't, it's just really really sad.


----------



## Aden (Jan 21, 2010)

MeisuWeasel said:


> You guys honestly amuse me. I should brought popcorn and a slushie.



Ah yes, the "you puny dissenters amuse me" routine. Don't forget your vest and bubble pipe.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 21, 2010)

Aden said:


> Ah yes, the "you puny dissenters amuse me" routine. Don't forget your vest and bubble pipe.


Alternately, he could wear a smoking jacket and swirl a snifter of brandy, no?


----------



## Hawkcon (Jan 21, 2010)

Enough, you retards! This is SUPPOSED to be a serious topic. NOT some nilly willy chit-chat that you can do in IM!

My replies to those of you who are serious about this topic, what I am railing against isn't against artists who do human art, per se, but artists who ONLY human porn.
Should an artist do art with humans IN pictures/drawings with furries, then it would still count as a furry-picture and wouldn't have to be dealt with. If you all remember  "the fisherman's wife," dealt with an octopus and a woman being pleasured by said octopus.
That, in my opinion would be dealt as a furry-art piece.

Why I DON'T bash CRAPPY furry porn, is because, I've said it several times: It's FURRY.  Nothing else needs to be said on that, except maybe later it might be addressed that furry porn could be moved to yiffstar.com, but that's a matter for later discussion.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 21, 2010)

Hawkcon said:


> Enough, you retards! This is SUPPOSED to be a serious topic. NOT some nilly willy chit-chat that you can do in IM!
> 
> My replies to those of you who are serious about this topic, what I am railing against isn't against artists who do human art, per se, but artists who ONLY human porn.


We've already come to a consensus that you're braindead and should get the fuck out. So do so.



> Should an artist do art with humans IN pictures/drawings with furries, then it would still count as a furry-picture and wouldn't have to be dealt with. If you all remember  "the fisherman's wife," dealt with an octopus and a woman being pleasured by said octopus.
> That, in my opinion would be dealt as a furry-art piece.
> 
> Why I DON'T bash CRAPPY furry porn, is because, I've said it several times: It's FURRY.  Nothing else needs to be said on that, except maybe later it might be addressed that furry porn could be moved to yiffstar.com, but that's a matter for later discussion.


Super cool story, bro.


----------



## Whitenoise (Jan 21, 2010)

Hawkcon said:


> Enough, you retards! This is SUPPOSED to be a serious topic. NOT some nilly willy chit-chat that you can do in IM!
> 
> My replies to those of you who are serious about this topic, what I am railing against isn't against artists who do human art, per se, but artists who ONLY human porn.
> Should an artist do art with humans IN pictures/drawings with furries, then it would still count as a furry-picture and wouldn't have to be dealt with. If you all remember  "the fisherman's wife," dealt with an octopus and a woman being pleasured by said octopus.
> ...



Lol :V .


----------



## Aden (Jan 21, 2010)

Hawkcon said:


> Enough, you retards! This is SUPPOSED to be a serious topic. NOT some nilly willy chit-chat that you can do in IM!
> 
> My replies to those of you who are serious about this topic, what I am railing against isn't against artists who do human art, per se, but artists who ONLY human porn.
> Should an artist do art with humans IN pictures/drawings with furries, then it would still count as a furry-picture and wouldn't have to be dealt with. If you all remember  "the fisherman's wife," dealt with an octopus and a woman being pleasured by said octopus.
> ...



Bawwwww


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 21, 2010)

Hey, OP, can I get a link to this picture of Toph as a futa?

I don't even know who Toph is, but loli + futa is a great combination.


----------



## Teco (Jan 21, 2010)

Hawkcon said:


> Enough, you retards! This is SUPPOSED to be a serious topic. NOT some nilly willy chit-chat that you can do in IM!
> 
> My replies to those of you who are serious about this topic, what I am railing against isn't against artists who do human art, per se, but artists who ONLY human porn.
> Should an artist do art with humans IN pictures/drawings with furries, then it would still count as a furry-picture and wouldn't have to be dealt with. If you all remember "the fisherman's wife," dealt with an octopus and a woman being pleasured by said octopus.
> ...



Ah! Oh god my sides! My.. My fucking sides! PPPPPPPFFFFFTTTTT


----------



## RevaDiehard (Jan 21, 2010)

Hawkcon said:


> If you all remember  "the fisherman's wife," dealt with an octopus and a woman being pleasured by said octopus.
> That, in my opinion would be dealt as a furry-art piece.



I'm pretty sure an octopus fucking a chick is bestiality x: a really weird form of bestiality.

and no I don't wanna see Toph in any sexual situation :C


----------



## WarMocK (Jan 22, 2010)

RevaDiehard said:


> I'm pretty sure an octopus fucking a chick is bestiality x: a really weird form of bestiality.


tentacle raep  


RevaDiehard said:


> and no I don't wanna see Toph in any sexual situation :C


Rule 34


----------



## Taren Fox (Jan 22, 2010)

WarMocK said:


> tentacle raep



How did that even get thought up? Some guy eating sushi in Japan thought "Hum... What if I put *this* up *there*?".


----------



## Skywolfe (Jan 22, 2010)

Eh I say whatever makes one happy, it can't be that bad.


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 22, 2010)

Taren Fox said:


> How did that even get thought up? Some guy eating sushi in Japan thought "Hum... What if I put *this* up *there*?".


Actually, you could be more right than you know.

"The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife" is around 190 years old by now. If anyone ever figures out its exact date of completion, let me know so I can declare it Tentacle Day :V


----------



## WarMocK (Jan 22, 2010)

Rigor Sardonicus said:


> Actually, you could be more right than you know.
> 
> "The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife" is around 190 years old by now. If anyone ever figures out its exact date of completion, let me know so I can declare it Tentacle Day :V



*Imagines Furries celebrating Tentacle Day and decorating a tree with octopus arms and calamari* :A


----------



## Ozriel (Jan 22, 2010)

Hawkcon said:


> Enough, you retards! This is SUPPOSED to be a serious topic. NOT some nilly willy chit-chat that you can do in IM!
> 
> My replies to those of you who are serious about this topic, what I am railing against isn't against artists who do human art, per se, but artists who ONLY human porn.
> Should an artist do art with humans IN pictures/drawings with furries, then it would still count as a furry-picture and wouldn't have to be dealt with. If you all remember  "the fisherman's wife," dealt with an octopus and a woman being pleasured by said octopus.
> ...



Only allow crappy porn with vertical vaginas, downward erections, and borderline zoophile porn? Standards on porn are really low here. 


*-Devil's Advocate-*
Also, the Fishermans wife kinda classififes as bestiality. :V


EDIT: Every time I read this thread, I can't help but to think of backwards hands.


----------



## Aden (Jan 22, 2010)

Hawkcon said:


> Why I DON'T bash CRAPPY furry porn, is because, I've said it several times: It's FURRY.  Nothing else needs to be said on that, except maybe later it might be addressed that furry porn could be moved to yiffstar.com, but that's a matter for later discussion.



tl;dr: oh shit I can't fap to this, let's ban it


----------



## Rigor Sardonicus (Jan 22, 2010)

WarMocK said:


> *Imagines Furries celebrating Tentacle Day and decorating a tree with octopus arms and calamari* :A


That'd be pretty sweet. Calamari is full of yum :3


----------



## Taren Fox (Jan 22, 2010)

Omnomnom


----------



## Firehazard (Jan 24, 2010)

Aden said:


> tl;dr: oh shit I can't fap to this, let's ban it



I hereby declare my list of fetishes to consist of "everything that's not on your list" and launch my own crusade to rid the site of stuff I can't fap to.

hey wait a sec


----------



## PKBitchGirl (Mar 9, 2010)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Wait...you do realize that furries create crappy porn too, right? With the vertical vaginas, downward erections, etc...etc..Why are you just picking on the human stuff?



Vertical vaginas? You mean stomach!cunt?



Taren Fox said:


> How did that even get thought up? Some guy eating sushi in Japan thought "Hum... What if I put *this* up *there*?".



It's from 1820, LOL the Japanese were producing alternative porn even then...


----------



## pickledance (Mar 11, 2010)

Oh shit I better get the fuck out since the majority of my gallery is humans.

derp.


----------



## CombatRaccoon (Mar 11, 2010)

Hawkcon said:


> I personally have nothing against someone posting human porn-art on here as long as they don't do it in ALL of their art on the Main site. But to me, it still makes our site seem... more like a porn site to the human media.




lol. srsly?


----------



## TreacleFox (Mar 11, 2010)

who would look at it here?


----------



## Kusatsu (Mar 11, 2010)

grrr burn the humans

sex in hell, skinfags


----------



## Ozriel (Mar 11, 2010)

Kusatsu said:


> grrr burn the humans
> 
> sex in hell, skinfags



Lol


----------



## pickledance (Mar 12, 2010)

So I'm wondering what the OP's definition of a furry artist is: someone who is a furry and does art, or someone who does mostly anthropomorphic art?


----------



## crowhorn52 (Mar 12, 2010)

I personally think that on a site which the majority of the nature is "misunderstood" (i.e. furry "fandom" or whatever) that no porn should be allowed because it just hinders the furry community as a whole. 

Artistic nude- maybe. But if that is the case then you would never have furry porn. Definition of pornography last I knew, in an artistic sense, is if there is pubic hair.. Ofcourse I can just imagine naked mole rat porn now. e.e


----------



## crowhorn52 (Mar 12, 2010)

pickledance said:


> So I'm wondering what the OP's definition of a furry artist is: someone who is a furry and does art, or someone who does mostly anthropomorphic art?



I agree I think this needs to be clarified. I personally think there is a difference. I think the difference lies within the context and style and how it is applied to the fandom. If it is applied in any way to associations with a fandom I think it is then classed as "furry art." Not sure if I am making sense but it seems a difficult borderline.


----------



## Aden (Mar 12, 2010)

crowhorn52 said:


> I personally think that on a site which the majority of the nature is "misunderstood" (i.e. furry "fandom" or whatever) that no porn should be allowed because it just hinders the furry community as a whole.



I am okay with this


----------



## Anuv (Mar 16, 2010)

a


----------



## TashkentFox (Mar 16, 2010)

Anuv said:


> human porn is the worst



Badly drawn human porn is even worse.


----------

