# Can I get a teen's opinion on cub porn?



## coward67 (Jul 31, 2010)

lines on paper and not even a real child/teen is what I think but what do those who are at the age of cub porn characters think?

DISCLAIMER: this _should_ be worksafe and pg-13 but it is kind of hard for me to tell. Also cub porn is ok, actual photos are a gateway to child abuse.


----------



## TreacleFox (Jul 31, 2010)

Im 15.
I dont really care. =|


----------



## coward67 (Jul 31, 2010)

Zenia said:


> I am not a kid... but I find cub porn to be abhorrent and it is not ok just because it is a drawing.


 
I would like you to constructively tell me why, maybe there is something I just don't understand about how an innatimate piece of paper (or digitalart) can be not ok.


----------



## Zenia (Jul 31, 2010)

coward67 said:


> I would like you to constructively tell me why, maybe there is something I just don't understand about how an innatimate piece of paper (or digitalart) can be not ok.


To me it is what it represents. It might be a drawing, but it is still a child. I can't see how someone who looks at it and is turned on can't be turned on when they look at children. It is disgusting. You might think it is a harmless and not a gateway to actual child abuse... and maybe it isn't for some people... but there will always be people that soon can't be satisfied with drawings anymore and do worse and worse things. 

For me, if the age is under 18, it is a huge NO!!!! In real life. It is true, fictional characters are a little different... but cubs are prepubescent children! How could anyone be attracted to that? =_____=


----------



## Tally (Jul 31, 2010)

According to your logic a picture or video can be ok too. It's an inanimate object.



Zenia said:


> To me it is what it represents.
> 
> For me, if the age is under 18, it is a huge NO!!!!



This and this.


----------



## Smelge (Jul 31, 2010)

coward67 said:


> I would like you to constructively tell me why, maybe there is something I just don't understand about how an innatimate piece of paper (or digitalart) can be not ok.


 
If you went and wrote "KILL OBAMA KILL OBMA KILL OBAMA" on a bit of paper and walked around Washington holding it, you'd soon get in trouble for some lines on an inanimate bit of paper.

What is depicted, is child abuse. A normal thinking person doesn't wake up one morning and think "Hey, today I shall draw a child getting raped!". Generally if you decide you want to drwa something like that, you're doing it because it's one of your fantasies or kinks. You can be certain that the majority of what an artist draws is what they are in to. But of course, it's a cub, it's not human so that's fine. You know, except the bit where they're perceived as being pretty much human, just with some extra fluff, a tail and bigger ears.

And then you'll get the paedophiles that come along and use this nice little technical loophole to justify their fetish. "I can wank to this, because it's not child porn, it's art".

Ask yourself this. If you go to school, how would you feel if you knew that one of your teachers went home and drew cub porn? He's just spent an entire day working with kids, now he's drawing child-analogs getting dicks in them. That's not creepy. That's not a disturbing look into that persons psyche.


----------



## Smelge (Jul 31, 2010)

Tally said:


> According to your logic a picture or video can be ok too. It's an inanimate object.


 
Um, video is generally animate. It moves.


----------



## coward67 (Jul 31, 2010)

Zenia said:


> To me it is what it represents. It might be a drawing, but it is still a child. I can't see how someone who looks at it and is turned on can't be turned on when they look at children. It is disgusting. You might think it is a harmless and not a gateway to actual child abuse... and maybe it isn't for some people... but there will always be people that soon can't be satisfied with drawings anymore and do worse and worse things.
> 
> For me, if the age is under 18, it is a huge NO!!!! In real life. It is true, fictional characters are a little different... but cubs are prepubescent children! How could anyone be attracted to that? =_____=



You do have a point but furry is not human. I would much rather have people going around looking at drawings of non human under 18's, than have them go and abuse a real life child or look at real photos of childporn, which would really not be ok. trust me, I know. I had a friend who was raped when she was only a couple months past 17, which is not ok but as long as the drawings don't actually depict rape, then it is absolutely fine.


----------



## coward67 (Jul 31, 2010)

You guys thought I meant rape cub porn? I meant solo or cub on cub porn. I am VERY strongly against rape.

EDIT: Besides, let's not let this thread turn into an argument.


----------



## Jawyen (Jul 31, 2010)

coward67 said:


> trust me, I know.



Hmm...Where have I heard that before :S?


----------



## Tally (Jul 31, 2010)

coward67 said:


> Besides, let's not let this thread turn into an argument.


 
Welcome to FaF.


----------



## Smelge (Jul 31, 2010)

coward67 said:


> You do have a point but furry is not human.


Ah yes, that old one. "Oh, it's not human so that's totally fine". No, it's not meant to be a human. But it is humanised and the sentiments still remain. You're looking at porn of something that is considered to be at the same intellectual level as a human, but for some reason it's fine for the purposes of underage fucking?



> I would much rather have people going around looking at drawings of non human under 18's, than have them go and abuse a real life child or look at real photos of childporn, which would really not be ok.


This is the most fucking retarded excuse ever. "We need our furry child porn, so we don't go out and accidentally a whole child". Yes, because a drawing of child porn means they are unlikely to start thinking it's ok to wank to child porn. Really? You want this sort of thing discouraged, not encouraged, and giving them a safe place to find that stuff just makes the problems worse.



> trust me, I know. I had a friend who was raped when she was only a couple months past 17, which is not ok but as long as the drawings don't actually depict rape, then it is absolutely fine.


And she wouldn't have been raped if the attacker had had child porn art! Of course! These two things are completely related. How could we have been so blind? So if the drawing is of a cub of, say, 5, and he's saying "sure, I want your penis in me, daddy", that's fine because a child of that age would completely understand the whole sex thing and be able to give informed consent.


----------



## Zenia (Jul 31, 2010)

coward67 said:


> I would much rather have people going around looking at drawings of non human under 18's, than have them go and abuse a real life child or look at real photos of childporn, which would really not be ok.


I think it is sick that you are trying to justify it. None of those things is ok. Not at all.


----------



## Evandeskunk (Jul 31, 2010)

Meadow said:


> Im 15.
> I dont really care. =|



This because I'm 15 and I don't care.


----------



## Airborne_Piggy (Jul 31, 2010)

Tally said:


> According to your logic a picture or video can be ok too. It's an inanimate object.
> 
> 
> 
> This and this.


Another flawed point. You're trying to give us an image of real child pornography, which isn't the case here. Cub porn is drawn images, and cub porn videos are still a series of images. There's no difference besides one is animated.



Smelge said:


> If you went and wrote "KILL OBAMA KILL OBMA KILL OBAMA" on a bit of paper and walked around Washington holding it, you'd soon get in trouble for some lines on an inanimate bit of paper.
> 
> What is depicted, is child abuse. A normal thinking person doesn't wake up one morning and think "Hey, today I shall draw a child getting raped!". Generally if you decide you want to drwa something like that, you're doing it because it's one of your fantasies or kinks. You can be certain that the majority of what an artist draws is what they are in to. But of course, it's a cub, it's not human so that's fine. You know, except the bit where they're perceived as being pretty much human, just with some extra fluff, a tail and bigger ears.
> 
> ...


Just because somebody doesn't look at cub or child porn, doesn't not make him/her a pedophile. Your point please?
Also, just because it's viewed as disgusting or disturbing, doesn't, by default, make it wrong or amoral.


Does 18yr. old count?
If so I don't give a shit as long as no REAL animals are being harmed, and people who do give a shit tend to act like "BAWW GROSS I DUN LIEK IT BAN IT!"
Personally I find cub porn to be utterly repulsive, but I don't wish to impede on someone's ability to draw and post whatever they want.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Jul 31, 2010)

coward67 said:


> DISCLAIMER: this _should_ be worksafe and pg-13 but it is kind of hard for me to tell. Also cub porn is ok, actual photos are a gateway to child abuse.


 So just because it isn't drawn means that people who look at it will become child rapists. Um, okay.

Look, you can't just say that one form of child porn will turn people into rapists and another one won't, that's fucking stupid. They're all in the same boat, even if I'd personally say that the drawn stuff is better because no real children were abused in the making of those pictures.


----------



## Smelge (Jul 31, 2010)

Airborne_Piggy said:


> Just because somebody doesn't look at cub or child porn, doesn't not make him/her a pedophile. Your point please?
> Also, just because it's viewed as disgusting or disturbing, doesn't, by default, make it wrong or amoral.


 
I didn't say that not looking at it doesn't stop you being paedophillic. Just that what you'll find, is that when you have a fetish or you like certain things, you'll look for or create porn relevant to your interests. It is possible to view the stuff without being a paedophile yourself, it's when the interests start building up and you look at more and more of it of your own free will.

I've always wondered how the police manage. If you view Child porn images, you've broken the law. So how do they decide who has to scan through the images they find on seized hard drives? Someone has to look at them to verify the suspect had these things.

And a lot of people get mixed up on the cub issue. They think cub automatically means porn. Cub art is just young characters, which can be cute or whatever. That is not a problem until people start bringing in the whole diaper fetish, watersports, scat and porn. Then it's cub porn. Two different things. Basic cub art is non-sexual.


----------



## Dan. (Jul 31, 2010)

An opinion from a teen, being myself, it's pedophillia..


----------



## Stargazer Bleu (Jul 31, 2010)

I don't mind when it just clean art.
Any thing else goes over the line on my opinion.


----------



## Maddawg (Jul 31, 2010)

Personaly I don't like the fact that cub porn is avaliable. So I can with 100% backing say I think it is completely sick and wrong.


----------



## Jawyen (Jul 31, 2010)

What do you think inspired adults to shave their body in the first place? (Just had to say that).

I'm 16 and I don't really care. (But thats because I'm a stupid tard and doesn't know any better ).


----------



## Dan. (Jul 31, 2010)

Getting turned on by children in any shape or form means your a pedophile, full stop, no exceptions.


----------



## Smelge (Jul 31, 2010)

Jawyen said:


> What do you think inspired adults to shave their body in the first place? (Just had to say that).


 
FFFFfffuuuuuu...

Because it's always nice to be able to see what you are doing. And no-one likes hairs caught in their teeth.


----------



## Jawyen (Jul 31, 2010)

Smelge said:


> And no-one likes hairs caught in their teeth.



(The whole body) Or prehaps it did also occur when people gave each other blowjobs to :-D.


----------



## slydude851 (Jul 31, 2010)

I'm 15 but I don't look at it.  In my mind, it could be classified as pedophilia if you do get turned on by cubs, anthro or not.


----------



## ProfessorBellom (Jul 31, 2010)

Meadow said:


> Im 15.
> I dont really care. =|


I'm 14 and I couldn't care less.


----------



## Ben (Jul 31, 2010)

So, I'm 17, and I'll be 18 in October.

Personally, I don't have a problem with cub porn, and I find it ridiculous that people are so adamant about trying to have it banned from the site. For one, looking at it doesn't necessarily mean you're a pedophile, as some people might enjoy thinking of themselves as the child instead of the adult (given that there are any adults in the piece). People have fetishes for different reasons, and to assume otherwise is just silly.

Now, if someone is looking at cub porn because they are a pedophile, I still wouldn't judge them as a person, because it's a victimless crime. If that person owned -actual- child porn or went out and diddled kids themselves? I'd have a problem with that. But really, it's lines on paper, and it's a healthy alternative. Would I be friends with someone who was a lover of cub porn? Possibly not, since that means they're being a little too open about their fetishes for my tastes. But so is about half this website, so to try to kick them off just seems absurd, since it's foaming at the brink with perverts.


----------



## Evandeskunk (Jul 31, 2010)

Lots of teens here :I


----------



## Jawyen (Jul 31, 2010)

Evandenoob said:


> Lots of teens here :I



Together, we shall conquer the forum! To bad it will only last untill we are all adults :3.


----------



## Evandeskunk (Jul 31, 2010)

Jawyen said:


> Together, we shall conquer the forum! To bad it will only last untill we are all adults :3.



Sounds like a KND thing


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

I don't like it. I don't like shotacon and lolicon in that way either. 

Child is a child dude, even if it is on paper.


----------



## Verin Asper (Jul 31, 2010)

Evandenoob said:


> Lots of teens here :I


 its said over 30% of the fandom is Teens









it explains why so many times folks openly ask if they gay
then days later go "nah I'm straight", those poor sexually confused teens


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jul 31, 2010)

coward67 said:


> You guys thought I meant rape cub porn? I meant solo or cub on cub porn. I am VERY strongly against rape.
> 
> EDIT: Besides, let's not let this thread turn into an argument.



How in the f*ck can you be against rape porn but justify cub porn? That makes no sense dude.


----------



## Misterraptor (Jul 31, 2010)

16, And I avoid it... Other things I can mind, although I just ignore them.


----------



## Enwon (Jul 31, 2010)

I'm 15, and I'm very strongly against cub porn, because when pedophiles fap to it, they're more likely to actually molest a child, and also, the cub porn communities will be a hugbox for this perversion of normal sexuality, allowing pedophiles to accept their attraction to children as something other than the unhealthy and immoral fetish that it is.


----------



## Aleu (Jul 31, 2010)

I don't like it but I find it retarded that people are bawwwwing about the non-existent children. Lines. On. Paper. That's all it is.
If it's bad because it's illegal then ban anything that has to do with illegal activities including rape, murder, illicit drug use, bestiality, etc etc etc.



N106 said:


> I'm 15, and I'm very strongly against cub porn,  because when pedophiles fap to it, they're more likely to actually  molest a child, and also, the cub porn communities will be a hugbox for  this perversion of normal sexuality, allowing pedophiles to accept their  attraction to children as something other than the unhealthy and  immoral fetish that it is.


 That's a very flawed argument. That's like saying "I'm against violent video games because it'll teach kids that murder is okay"


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

N106 said:


> I'm 15, and I'm very strongly against cub porn, because when pedophiles fap to it, they're more likely to actually molest a child, and also, the cub porn communities will be a hugbox for this perversion of normal sexuality, allowing pedophiles to accept their attraction to children as something other than the unhealthy and immoral fetish that it is.


 Half true. If someone's a pedophile, it's up to them to actually act on physically abusing a child, which in some cases is fueled by viewing any form of child porn. 

People want to make pedophiles feel accepted and that just because they have this perversion towards children, that they shouldn't be treated as any less human, well that just gives them the idea that it's okay to fantasize about having sex with kids.


----------



## Pliio8 (Jul 31, 2010)

To me:

If a pedo goes to any child porn of any form, cub, bestiality, ect, it will give them the idea more to abuse a child.

Pedophillia is, well, Pedophillia. It is only a fetish if that cannot get pleasure without a little kid. Otherwise, it is just a fantasy, and is no more a perversion of sexuality than my capnolagnia.

You blame the players not the game. As in: you blame those who can't bottle their thoughts and act upon it, not every one of them.


----------



## Tao (Jul 31, 2010)

As long as it doesn't wear a diaper, I don't care. I don't look at cub porn so why should I care too much about it?


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

Pliio8 said:


> You blame the players not the game. As in: you blame those who can't bottle their thoughts and act upon it, not every one of them.


 Though people like to assume that just because one is like that, they're all like that. Story of every stereotype ever.


----------



## Pliio8 (Jul 31, 2010)

Willow said:


> Though people like to assume that just because one is like that, they're all like that. Story of every stereotype ever.


 
Indeed. That si what I am basically saying. Just because on acts on it, doesn't mean they act on it.


----------



## foxmusk (Jul 31, 2010)

18 here.

i STILL fail to see the big deal about it. people are claiming over and over again that it's a gateway into real child molestation, but i have yet to read more than maybe one or two stories where furries interested in cub porn turned out to actually be pedophiles...and those furries probably were pedos before they got into cub porn. there was probably loli or shota before that.

and i do NOT believe it is a gateway for temptation, either. as someone with eccentric furry fetishes, i can tell you that not once i have been tempted to take a fetish over into real life. i'm no genius, either. i have an average IQ, and i'm no smarter than anyone else. i WILL say, though, that i feel much more relaxed about my fetishes when there's harmless art of it i can enjoy instead. by no means am i saying that if i didn't have the art, i would go out and commit them, but it makes it less frustrating, so to speak.

i don't agree that cub porn is on the same lines as pedophilia. that is the same as saying that gore art (even in anime or NON-SEXUAL settings) is the same as real murder and should be illegal too. do i think real child porn is wrong? yes. that's exploitation. do i think loli/shota is wrong? no. it's drawn, same as cub.

if you HONESTLY think cub porn should be illegalized or is so wrong even though it's drawn, i hope you feel the same about:
drawn zoo porn (which most of you do, i know)
drawn feral porn
drawn gore, even in a non-sexual setting
drawn rape
drawn abuse, even in a non-sexual setting
DRAWN DRUG USE, the most overlooked of them all
etc.

if not, there is no foothold for an argument. you can't play one part of the game and try to justify the others. either all drawn forms of crimes should be illegal or none of them.

also, just because you're turned on by cub or shota does not mean that you are actually turned on by human children. it's weird, i know, but take it personally. i like cub art. some shota is okay. i am in NO WAY attracted to human children. at all.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jul 31, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> 18 here.
> 
> i STILL fail to see the big deal about it. people are claiming over and over again that it's a gateway into real child molestation, but i have yet to read more than maybe one or two stories where furries interested in cub porn turned out to actually be pedophiles...and those furries probably were pedos before they got into cub porn. there was probably loli or shota before that.



It is those one or two stories that make people think all of them can use it as a gateway. I can understand why, I mean if the odd few can, there is nothing to say all can't. But just because a few have used it as a gateway does not mean all will.At the end of the day it is down to self control, and as incidents of furries viewing furry cub porn actually mole



> and i do NOT believe it is a gateway for temptation, either. as someone with eccentric furry fetishes, i can tell you that not once i have been tempted to take a fetish over into real life. i'm no genius, either. i have an average IQ, and i'm no smarter than anyone else. i WILL say, though, that i feel much more relaxed about my fetishes when there's harmless art of it i can enjoy instead. by no means am i saying that if i didn't have the art, i would go out and commit them, but it makes it less frustrating, so to speak.



To me, art is art, it is fictional. Even if I find some of it sickening, I just ignore what I don't like.



> i don't agree that cub porn is on the same lines as pedophilia. that is the same as saying that gore art (even in anime or NON-SEXUAL settings) is the same as real murder and should be illegal too. do i think real child porn is wrong? yes. that's exploitation. do i think loli/shota is wrong? no. it's drawn, same as cub.



Fair point.



> if you HONESTLY think cub porn should be illegalized or is so wrong even though it's drawn, i hope you feel the same about:
> drawn zoo porn (which most of you do, i know)
> drawn feral porn
> drawn gore, even in a non-sexual setting
> ...



I don't think drawing either of the above is a crime. It is only a crime if someone actually commits one of the above irl. I am going slightly off-topic here but, I remember when GTA 3 was first released on the PS2, people wanted to have it banned because of it's violent content, their argument was that people would mimicked what they did in the game. Of course it was never banned here, I love violent games, but I'd never recreate anything I do in a video game, IRL. 



> also, just because you're turned on by cub or shota does not mean that you are actually turned on by human children. it's weird, i know, but take it personally. i like cub art. some shota is okay. i am in NO WAY attracted to human children. at all.



Clean cub art I like because cubs are just cute and adorable and you just wanna hug them! (like I'd wanna cuddle real baby fluffy animals ^^) Cub porn, well, if it is cub on cub, or they are of the same age, I can live with it, but an adult raping a child, nuh uh, that's a no no for me. Though it doesn't turn me either way. If I was able to draw I'd edit nude cub pics and put clothes on them.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

I'm 17, and I find it just the same as childporn.
I don't give a fuck if it's lines on a paper, it's a representation of a kid/child having sex.
A kid is a kid no matter if it's on paper or off paper.
KIDS CANT EVEN HAVE SEX AT THAT AGE. Why the fuck are you drawing it?

Why are you getting a boner from drawing CUBS?
Little baby animals! There is obviously something wrong with your head if you're getting off to baby animals.

I have no issue with clean cub art (as long as they're not damn diaper furries..) because hey.. who the heck doesn't think baby animals are cute?
But you shouldn't put kids/cubs in a sexual setting. It just doesn't work right.
They can't properly have sexual intercourse anyways so.. why draw it?

Just draw some god damned midgets getting it on if you want to see small things having sex..

Not to mention, think of it as human kids on human kids art..
Little human kids having sex isn't exactly appealing is it? It's rather sickening if you think about it.
But nooo, just because the cub kids have fur it's SOOO much more acceptable than human kids fucking.


----------



## Jawyen (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> KIDS CANT EVEN HAVE SEX AT THAT AGE?!



Wich age are we talking about? (Neutral), Just whonder.


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

Jawyen said:


> Wich age are we talking about? (Neutral), Just whonder.


 Prepubescent, that's all you need to know.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Jawyen said:


> Wich age are we talking about? (Neutral), Just whonder.


 

I see cubs from the ages of able to walk up to their early teens.
(Puberty works at different ages, so I suppose in the early teens it all depends on the person/creature w/e)

I'm not sure what most of the people here consider as "cub" age.


----------



## CannonFodder (Jul 31, 2010)

I'm not a teen, but your fetishes say something about yourself as a person, when I eventually have kids if someone is into sexual depictions of adolescents yeaaah I'm not going to let them watch them.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Jul 31, 2010)

Pliio8 said:


> To me:
> 
> If a pedo goes to any child porn of any form, cub, bestiality, ect, it will give them the idea more to abuse a child.


 I love how people keep saying this without any actual evidence to back up these arguments. lolfurries


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

Kellie Gator said:


> I love how people keep saying this without any actual evidence to back up these arguments. lolfurries


It can be applied to video games, so it must apply to everything.


----------



## Loomy (Jul 31, 2010)

As a teenager (Well for 2 more weeks i am) i think it's disgusting.  But i also know as long as it's not actual children, it's legal.  So more power to the perverts who make it and the perverts who fap to it as long as they don't flaunt it in front of me.


----------



## Verin Asper (Jul 31, 2010)

Loomy said:


> As a teenager (Well for 2 more weeks i am) i think it's disgusting.  But i also know as long as it's not actual children, it's legal.  So more power to the perverts who make it and the perverts who fap to it as long as they don't flaunt it in front of me.


 its illegal in the UK....


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

CannonFodder said:


> I'm not a teen, but your fetishes say something about yourself as a person, when I eventually have kids if someone is into sexual depictions of adolescents yeaaah I'm not going to let them watch them.


 
This. This all the way, dude.


----------



## Loomy (Jul 31, 2010)

Crysix Fousen said:


> its illegal in the UK....


Can you show the statute?  I'm almost certain it's not.

Even if it is,  US > UK any day.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Loomy said:


> Can you show the statute?  I'm almost certain it's not.
> 
> Even if it is,  US > UK any day.


 
http://www.furteantimes.com/r/135_c...tively_bans_minor_furry_pornography_in_the_uk
Google it, it's not hard.

And FYI, America isn't the center of the universe.


PS: If you don't believe that post, here's the damn Google archives.
http://www.google.com/search?q=is+cub+porn+illegal+in+uk%3F&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> http://www.furteantimes.com/r/135_c...tively_bans_minor_furry_pornography_in_the_uk
> Google it, it's not hard.
> 
> And FYI, America isn't the center of the universe.


This post speaks truth.


----------



## Loomy (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> http://www.furteantimes.com/r/135_c...tively_bans_minor_furry_pornography_in_the_uk
> Google it, it's not hard.
> 
> And FYI, America isn't the center of the universe.



Holy fuck,  this is honestly the first I've heard of this law.  Such bullshit.  

If someones actions have zero direct effect on anyone else, he should be able to do whatever he wants.  Be it drawing babies being rapped by shitting dick nipples or whatever tickles your fancy, if it effects no one else directly then you should be able to do it.

I guess it doesn't really surprise me that much that the UK has such a law, being they are much more pro big government than the USA.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Hey, look who I found on this forum..

http://wildcritters.ws/wc/forum/show/4078?page=1

His name seems awfully familiar...


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Hey, look who I found on this forum..
> 
> http://wildcritters.ws/wc/forum/show/4078?page=1
> 
> His name seems awfully familiar...


 This is possibly the funniest thing I've seen all day.


----------



## Loomy (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Hey, look who I found on this forum..
> 
> http://wildcritters.ws/wc/forum/show/4078?page=1
> 
> His name seems awfully familiar...


 
I don't get it,  who are you talking about?


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Loomy said:


> Holy fuck,  this is honestly the first I've heard of this law.  Such bullshit.
> 
> If someones actions have zero direct effect on anyone else, he should be able to do whatever he wants.  Be it drawing babies being rapped by shitting dick nipples or whatever tickles your fancy, if it effects no one else directly then you should be able to do it.
> 
> I guess it doesn't really surprise me that much that the UK has such a law, being they are much more pro big government than the USA.


 

I, personally, wish the US had this law in effect.
We have so many pedophiles and i'll be damn honest, cartoony kids having sex probably doesn't want them to stop being a pedophile any time soon.
I don't care if there is no evidence of it, it's logical for them to not want to stop when they have this shit at their disposal.

Even if it doesn't directly effect a community, it's still morally wrong.
If you're 18+ and looking at little kids assfucking, you need some help.



Loomy said:


> I don't get it,  who are you talking about?


 Look at my signature and the guy who posted the thread i nthat forum.


----------



## CannonFodder (Jul 31, 2010)

Loomy said:


> Can you show the statute?  I'm almost certain it's not.
> 
> Even if it is,  US > UK any day.


 There are as many furries in the UK as the US.
In order of how many furries there are by country-
1)UK(It is going mainstream there) & the US
2)Australia
3)European countries
In fact there are 20 countries where the fandom has a decent presence, there are about 300k in the US, worldwide about 1.4million.


gatorguts said:


> And FYI, America isn't the center of the universe.


 Technically wouldn't the molten core be the center? :V
If we're talking metaphorical, then china would be.


----------



## Verin Asper (Jul 31, 2010)

Loomy said:


> Holy fuck,  this is honestly the first I've heard of this law.  Such bullshit.
> 
> If someones actions have zero direct effect on anyone else, he should be able to do whatever he wants.  Be it drawing babies being rapped by shitting dick nipples or whatever tickles your fancy, if it effects no one else directly then you should be able to do it.
> 
> I guess it doesn't really surprise me that much that the UK has such a law, being they are much more pro big government than the USA.


 wut...theirs only a step up above the US, the US is "Humanoid" the U.K. is "EVERYTHING"
all they have to do take out Human and put in EVERYTHING like the UK did and boom we are the same


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Willow said:


> This is possibly the funniest thing I've seen all day.


 I like when the mouse guys says, "You're stupid your just so damn stupid. Even your avatar reflects how dumb you are. 
That cat looks retarded and you should feel bad."

I lold.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jul 31, 2010)

Crysix Fousen said:


> its illegal in the UK....



I too would like to see this statute because I am not aware it is illegal here.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I too would like to see this statute because I am not aware it is illegal here.


 It's not hard to scroll up and look for links.
Honestly.


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> I like when the mouse guys says, "You're stupid your just so damn stupid. Even your avatar reflects how dumb you are.
> That cat looks retarded and you should feel bad."
> 
> I lold.


 Is it just me or does almost everyone in the thread have a rodent avatar?


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Willow said:


> Is it just me or does almost everyone in the thread have a rodent avatar?


 
Not this guy.
http://wildcritters.ws/wc/forum/show/4078?page=2#4122

He's cool.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jul 31, 2010)

Loomy said:


> I don't get it,  who are you talking about?




Collision Cat. His name sounds familiar to me too.


----------



## Slyck (Jul 31, 2010)

No.

Cub porn is just wrong.


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I too would like to see this statute because I am not aware it is illegal here.


 Randy, we had a thread on this a few months ago. 



gatorguts said:


> Not this guy.
> http://wildcritters.ws/wc/forum/show/4078?page=2#4122
> 
> He's cool.


 There were several who didn't, but for the most part I saw rodents


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Willow said:


> There were several who didn't, but for the most part I saw rodents


 
Mice must be the new pedobears.
Pedomouse.


----------



## Loomy (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> I, personally, wish the US had this law in effect.
> We have so many pedophiles and i'll be damn honest, cartoony kids having sex probably doesn't want them to stop being a pedophile any time soon.
> I don't care if there is no evidence of it, it's logical for them to not want to stop when they have this shit at their disposal.
> 
> ...


 

Why should it be your morals that defines what is morally wrong?  What if the immigrant from Saudi Arabia says anything below the age of 10 should be what's banned, not below 18 like your morals?  To limit free speech for everyone to spite a relatively small number of perverts goes against 240 years of legislation.  The punishment for being caught with actual CP or solicitating sex from a child needs to be tantamount to murder,  that would stop the vast number of pedophiles. 

And saying the existence of cub porn is the cause of pedophilia is a red herring.  Pedophiles existed hundreds of years ago, and it will exist hundreds of years from now.  It's just that today it's so vilified that any time it happens, it's told of throughout the media.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jul 31, 2010)

Willow said:


> Randy, we had a thread on this a few months ago.
> 
> 
> There were several who didn't, but for the most part I saw rodents



I didn't see this thread. This may come as a surprise to most but I am not super glued to FAF.


----------



## CannonFodder (Jul 31, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I too would like to see this statute because I am not aware it is illegal here.


 It is illegal, it's just you'd have to be the biggest idiot ever/have a terrible lawyer to go to jail for it.


----------



## Alstor (Jul 31, 2010)

I'm 15.

I have the stance on the issue as "don't like, don't look." But, I have a question for the people that use the "lines on paper" argument.

You say that drawings of child porn (or in this case, cub porn) is different than videos of child porn. However, they are still both child porn, even when it's real or not. I can see where you guys are coming from, but why do you try to separate two parts of the same type of fetish? And saying that "videos show real child abuse" is just one reason, rather than the multiple reasons you need to make a true argument.


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

And it's not even viewing it that's illegal I believe, just being in possession of it.


----------



## CannonFodder (Jul 31, 2010)

Loomy said:


> Why should it be your morals that defines what is morally wrong?


 And here is why I hate most moral relativists even though I believe in moral relativity myself, people like you only believe it to give justification towards your actions.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Loomy said:


> Why should it be your morals that defines what is morally wrong?  What if the immigrant from Saudi Arabia says anything below the age of 10 should be what's banned, not below 18 like your morals?  To limit free speech for everyone to spite a relatively small number of perverts goes against 240 years of legislation.  The punishment for being caught with actual CP or solicitating sex from a child needs to be tantamount to murder,  that would stop the vast number of pedophiles.
> 
> And saying the existence of cub porn is the cause of pedophilia is a red herring.  Pedophiles existed hundreds of years ago, and it will exist hundreds of years from now.  It's just that today it's so vilified that any time it happens, it's told of throughout the media.


 
Lmao, I apparently have the morals of a 10 year old now. I guess my good morals make me a child.
Also, free speech doesn't give you the liberty to say anything you want or do anything you want. It just means you can tell someone to fuck off without getting arrested.

And I never said Cub Porn is what caused pedophilia, lol. You're not even reading what i'm typing. I said it doesn't make them want to stop being one. They have pornography that isn't illegal right at their disposal.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jul 31, 2010)

CannonFodder said:


> It is illegal, it's just you'd have to be the biggest idiot ever/have a terrible lawyer to go to jail for it.



Ahh.


----------



## Verin Asper (Jul 31, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I didn't see this thread. This may come as a surprise to most but I am not super glued to FAF.


 There was a massive shitstorm when UK passed that law that sparked at least 5 threads of UK furs going "OMG BAN CUB PORN SO WE CAN COME TO FA CAUSE THE UK WILL BAN THE SITE"
then us going "LOL, you fags go re-read the damn law, it only pertains if you download it and live in the UK and also UK base hosting sites"


----------



## Dan. (Jul 31, 2010)

It's child pornography no matter what you say....


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jul 31, 2010)

Dan. said:


> It's child pornography no matter what you say....



We could also say that anthro's are zoophilic depictions. :/



Crysix Fousen said:


> There was a massive shitstorm when UK  passed that law that sparked at least 5 threads of UK furs going "OMG  BAN CUB PORN SO WE CAN COME TO FA CAUSE THE UK WILL BAN THE SITE"
> then  us going "LOL, you fags go re-read the damn law, it only pertains if  you download it and live in the UK and also UK base hosting  sites"



Oh yeah I remember those now.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Jul 31, 2010)

Dan. said:


> It's child pornography no matter what you say....


 You've made at least three or four generic posts in this thread about how "CUB PORN IS BAD MMKAY". We got it the first time already, what the fuck are you trying to accomplish by repeating yourself? :/


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Dan. said:


> It's child pornography no matter what you say....


 Thisssss.


----------



## Loomy (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Lmao, I apparently have the morals of a 10 year old now. I guess my good morals make me a child.


Not exactly what i said,  I was attempting to make the point that people from around the world have different ages of consent, Saudi Arabia being one of the lowest.


> Also, free speech doesn't give you the liberty to say anything you want or do anything you want. It just means you can tell someone to fuck off without getting arrested.


Fee speech wasn't imbued in the constitution to protect the things that everyone likes, it was put in to protect that which is universally hated.  Even recently there have been judges who have said stripping is an art and people under 18 can perform in the shows.  So yes, CP is part of the first amendment.

http://theothermccain.com/2010/02/12/iowa-court-oks-17-year-old-strippers/



> And I never said Cub Porn is what caused pedophilia, lol. You're not even reading what i'm typing. I said it doesn't make them want to stop being one. They have pornography that isn't illegal right at their disposal.


I misread that part,  you got me there.


----------



## Dan. (Jul 31, 2010)

Kellie Gator said:


> You've made at least three or four generic posts in this thread about how "CUB PORN IS BAD MMKAY". We got it the first time already, what the fuck are you trying to accomplish by repeating yourself? :/


 
I was just trying to get a word in, jeez...


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Loomy said:


> Not exactly what i said,  I was attempting to make the point that people from around the world have different ages of consent, Saudi Arabia being one of the lowest.


 Well I don't believe we're talking about those types of countries here.
More along the lines of the USA, UK, Canada, Australia.. Mostly the more populated places with internetz, I guess..? Countries with better laws figured out.



Loomy said:


> Free speech wasn't imbued in the constitution to protect the things that  everyone likes, it was put in to protect that which is universally  hated.  Even recently there have been judges who have said stripping is  an art and people under 18 can perform in the shows.  So yes, CP is part  of the first amendment.


Also, those judges must be retarded or pedophiles because stripping is a minor performing a sexual act.
If you're above 16 in America (depending on state), you don't need consent, but it's still kind of fucked up.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jul 31, 2010)

Kellie Gator said:


> You've made at least three or four generic posts in this thread about how "CUB PORN IS BAD MMKAY". We got it the first time already, what the fuck are you trying to accomplish by repeating yourself? :/



Call him polly and offer him a cracker.


----------



## Verin Asper (Jul 31, 2010)

Loomy said:


> Fee speech wasn't imbued in the constitution to protect the things that everyone likes, it was put in to protect that which is universally hated.  Even recently there have been judges who have said stripping is an art and people under 18 can perform in the shows.  So yes, CP is part of the first amendment.


 and tell me, have you heard of the states going "lol....*stern face*no....no...its still wrong"


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Well I don't believe we're talking about those types of countries here.
> More along the lines of the USA, UK, Canada, Australia.. Mostly the more populated places with internetz, I guess..? Countries with better laws figured out.



Legal age of consent is lower here than the USA, it is 16 here.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> Legal age of consent is lower here than the USA, it is 16 here.


 In the USA, I think each state has a different age consent.
It's 16 here in Florida too.


----------



## Slyck (Jul 31, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> Legal age of consent is lower here than the USA, it is 16 here.


 Same with Washington.

To be in porno is still 18 though.


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> In the USA, I think each state has a different age consent.
> It's 16 here in Florida too.


 I believe it's like 14/15 in several states, mostly in the South. 
In Illinois it's 17.

And Japan is 14.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Willow said:


> I believe it's like 14/15 in several states, mostly in the South.
> In Illinois it's 17.
> 
> And Japan is 14.


 
Japan isn't a state.
Wtf you talkin' about Willis?!


----------



## Loomy (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Well I don't believe we're talking about those types of countries here.
> More along the lines of the USA, UK, Canada, Australia.. Mostly the more populated places with internetz, I guess..? Countries with better laws figured out.



But America is the melting pot of the world! 

With there being so many varying morals and cultures, a nation wide ban like the UK would misrepresent far too many people.  If a local town wants to make it illegal for a sex store to sell stories depicting minors, then go ahead for that town.  But for the government to start saying what is morally sound and what's not (Even if the vast majority of people agree) is not something that i would be ok with.

I guess i'm showing my libertarian colors here...



gatorguts said:


> Japan isn't a state.
> Wtf you talkin' about Willis?!


 
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...e&sa=X&ei=8IVUTMWyBMH68Aa8xpHgCA&ved=0CB0QkAE

9th bullet


----------



## Slyck (Jul 31, 2010)

Willow said:


> Japan


 Japan. Always relevant.


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Japan isn't a state.
> Wtf you talkin' about Willis?!


 The UK isn't either :3

I'm just sayin'


----------



## Slyck (Jul 31, 2010)

Loomy said:


> libertarian


 There's nothin' like shitting all over the world of politics, eh?


----------



## Verin Asper (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> In the USA, I think each state has a different age consent.
> It's 16 here in Florida too.


 wait

For Florida A person BELOW the age of 24 can be with someone who is 16, above 24 its illegal


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Loomy said:


> But America is the melting pot of the world!
> 
> With there being so many varying morals and cultures, a nation wide ban like the UK would misrepresent far too many people.  If a local town wants to make it illegal for a sex store to sell stories depicting minors, then go ahead for that town.  But for the government to start saying what is morally sound and what's not (Even if the vast majority of people agree) is not something that i would be ok with.
> 
> I guess i'm showing my libertarian colors here...


 
We're not talking about stories, we're talking about drawn artwork (but I guess stories could fit into this too..)..
And it's not like the US hasn't already butthurt tons of countries/cultures with out laws. If they don't like it, they don't have to live here.
I don't see other countries exactly trying to be a hugbox and making the place a rainbow of perfection for all cultures.

And if the vast majority of the people agree on a law, well then.. you'll have to deal with that.
That's how presidents are picked.
Nobody cares about the minority, honestly.



Crysix Fousen said:


> wait
> 
> For Florida A person BELOW the age of 24 can be with someone who is 16, above 24 its illegal


 
Nope, if you're 18+ and dating a 16 year old, the person the 18+ year old is dating needs parental consent.
Otherwise you'll be thrown into jail.

I've had family friends get thrown into jail for it.


----------



## CannonFodder (Jul 31, 2010)

Loomy said:


> But America is the melting pot of the world!


 Tell it to the indians that were mass murdered, the africans that were taken on slave ships, packed like cigars and then forced to work for the rest of their lives, the japanese americans that were put in internment camps, the mexicans who had a 1/3 of their country taken away.


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> We're not talking about stories, we're talking about drawn artwork (but I guess stories could fit into this too..)..


 Cub stories, ugh.


----------



## Zenia (Jul 31, 2010)

Age of consent where I live was 14, but it was raised to 16. I believe. I don't think it is right for someone as young as 16 to be having sex... but I am not so opposed to that as I am to preteens and children depicted (or doing irl) having sex. Even then, if you are over 18, people under 18 (provided it isn't a bf/gf that you had before you turned 18 and you are only a year different in age) should be off limits. TO do, to look at, to draw.

That all said... NON-PORN of cubs is fine.


----------



## Verin Asper (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Nope, if you're 18+ and dating a 16 year old, you need parental consent.
> Otherwise you'll be thrown into jail.
> 
> I've had family friends get thrown into jail for it.


Florida The age of consent in Florida is *18*,  but close in age exemptions exist. By law, the exception permits a  person 23 years of age or younger to engage in legal sexual activity  with a minor aged 16 or 17.
  794.05 Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors.-- (1) A person  24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person *16 or 17 years*  of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in  s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. As used in this section, "sexual  activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with,  the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include  an act done for a bona fide medical purpose Florida code, Title XLVI, Chapter 794


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Willow said:


> Cub stories, ugh.


 
"Where's my teddy bear!?
Oh, you're pawing off to him "


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

Zenia said:


> I don't think it is right for someone as young as 16 to be having sex...


 I don't fully agree with it either. I really don't feel the overwhelming need to stick anything up there right now, and I'm almost 16. 

Think, but not do. Just wait. That's one of my rules.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Crysix Fousen said:


> Florida The age of consent in Florida is *18*,  but close in age exemptions exist. By law, the exception permits a  person 23 years of age or younger to engage in legal sexual activity  with a minor aged 16 or 17.
> 794.05 Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors.-- (1) A person  24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person *16 or 17 years*  of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in  s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. As used in this section, "sexual  activity" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with,  the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include  an act done for a bona fide medical purpose Florida code, Title XLVI, Chapter 794


 
Your copypasta hurts my stomach.
But regardless of what _that_ says, i've seen 18+ year olds get thrown in jail for unknowingly sating minors.


----------



## Loomy (Jul 31, 2010)

CannonFodder said:


> Tell it to the indians that were mass murdered, the africans that were taken on slave ships, packed like cigars and then forced to work for the rest of their lives, the japanese americans that were put in internment camps, the mexicans who had a 1/3 of their country taken away.


 


			
				The New Colossus said:
			
		

> "Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me,I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"



Someone needs to get a more balanced look at history.


----------



## Verin Asper (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Your copypasta hurts my stomach.
> But regardless of what _that_ says, i've seen 18+ year olds get thrown in jail for unknowingly sating minors.


and again I have seen folks who are 20-23 dating those who are 16-17, then again those guys are actually willing to wait till their girlfriends turn 18


----------



## Tally (Jul 31, 2010)

Crysix Fousen said:


> and again I have seen folks who are 20-23 dating those who are 16-17, then again those guys are actually willing to wait till their girlfriends turn 18


 
At that age, it's kinda creepy to have someone five years older than you. Just my personal opinion though.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jul 31, 2010)

Tally said:


> At that age, it's kinda creepy to have someone five years older than you. Just my personal opinion though.



That's nothing, I have known a 16 year old to date 40-50 year olds.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> That's nothing, I have known a 16 year old to date 40-50 year olds.


 
Gold digger or just stupid?


----------



## Verin Asper (Jul 31, 2010)

Tally said:


> At that age, it's kinda creepy to have someone five years older than you. Just my personal opinion though.


 3-4 years tend to be normal due to highschool, my relationship was like that


----------



## CannonFodder (Jul 31, 2010)

Crysix Fousen said:


> and again I have seen folks who are 20-23 dating those who are 16-17, then again those guys are actually willing to wait till their girlfriends turn 18


 One of the problems you don't hear about often is alot of the sex offenders were actually a guy and a girl who were just 1 year to much apart.


Loomy said:


> Someone needs to get a more balanced look at history.


 So slavery didn't exist?
So internment camps didn't exist?
America didn't attempt to kill off every last indian?
The trail of tears didn't happen?


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

CannonFodder said:


> One of the problems you don't hear about often is alot of the sex offenders were actually a guy and a girl who were just 1 year to much apart.


 
Exactly.
Not to mention, some of the 'sex offenders' are also people who had no idea they were dating a minor because the girl/guy they were dating lied to them. A lot of underage girls/guys look really old these days.
I know 16 year old guys who can easily pull off being 21. :/


----------



## Loomy (Jul 31, 2010)

CannonFodder said:


> So slavery didn't exist?
> So internment camps didn't exist?
> America didn't attempt to kill off every last indian?
> The trail of tears didn't happen?



Conditions here aren't better than in other nations?
America isn't a land of opportunity?
America isn't a land of prosperity?
The American way of life isn't better in a subjective fashion than other ways of life?
America is unique, offering more freedom, and happiness than other nations, is it not?

I'm not refuting that these things didn't happen, but i am saying that the good the country has done greatly outweighs even it's biggest fuck ups.


----------



## CannonFodder (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Exactly.
> Not to mention, some of the 'sex offenders' are also people who had no idea they were dating a minor because the girl/guy they were dating lied to them. A lot of underage girls/guys look really old these days.
> I know 16 year old guys who can easily pull off being 21. :/


 The american political system is made of fail.


----------



## Airborne_Piggy (Jul 31, 2010)

N106 said:


> I'm 15, and I'm very strongly against cub porn, because when pedophiles fap to it, they're more likely to actually molest a child, and also, the cub porn communities will be a hugbox for this perversion of normal sexuality, allowing pedophiles to accept their attraction to children as something other than the unhealthy and immoral fetish that it is.


Are you stupid, or just willingly ignorant?
http://forums.furaffinity.net/threads/78395-People-will-go-quot-rabblerabble-quot-at-CP-but-why-not-Feral-porn?p=2083304&viewfull=1#post2083304



gatorguts said:


> I, personally, wish the US had this law in effect.
> We have so many pedophiles and i'll be damn honest, cartoony kids having sex probably doesn't want them to stop being a pedophile any time soon.
> I don't care if there is no evidence of it, it's logical for them to not want to stop when they have this shit at their disposal.
> 
> ...


You don't get it. A pedophile can't just, "stop being a pedophile" being a pedophile. That's like saying that "cartoony furs having sex probably doesn't want them to stop being a homosexual any time soon."




coward67 said:


> EDIT: Besides, let's not let this thread turn into an argument.


oops


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

CannonFodder said:


> The american political system is made of fail.


 That and the judges will always/usually side with the minor/usually the girl.


----------



## CannonFodder (Jul 31, 2010)

Loomy said:


> Conditions here aren't better than in other nations?
> America isn't a land of opportunity?
> America isn't a land of prosperity?
> The American way of life isn't better in a subjective fashion than other ways of life?
> ...


 Compared to other first world countries no.
No
No
No
No

Nothing more than propaganda.


----------



## CannonFodder (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> That and the judges will always/usually side with the minor/usually the girl.


 So true, there was a problem a while ago here and it was all over the news for a while, a underage teen girl raped a 20 year old guy and it dragged on forever because the jury couldn't decide who to send to prison.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

CannonFodder said:


> So true, there was a problem a while ago here and it was all over the news for a while, a underage teen girl raped a 20 year old guy and it dragged on forever because the jury couldn't decide who to send to prison.


 
Lmao, the jury must have consisted of idiots..
Last time I checked, rape wasn't gender biased.

If you rape someone, you to go jail.
Simple.


----------



## CannonFodder (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Lmao, the jury must have consisted of idiots..
> Last time I checked, rape wasn't gender biased.
> 
> If you rape someone, you to go jail.
> Simple.


 Actually some people think females are incapable of rape.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

CannonFodder said:


> Actually some people think females are incapable of rape.


 
_Rape_ is forced, unwanted sex.

Apparently women are unable to be forceful...


----------



## CrazyLee (Jul 31, 2010)

INB4 locked thread. I don't expect this to end well.



coward67 said:


> lines on paper and not even a real child/teen is what I think but what do those who are at the age of cub porn characters think?



Um, no one here posting is at the age of MOST of the subjects of cub porn, which is prepubesent, which is 12 or younger. To me, teen porn would technically be considered cub porn, but I never see it and think anything that's "teen" would look adult anway.

Case in point: Anime porn (hentai) very often depicts people between 14-18 years old in sexual situations. Anime characters that are that age, for instance. Take Rei Ayanami, anime's most popular female... 14 years old, and the internet is overflowing with porn of her. The difference is the fact that all the porn of anime characters usually depicts them with an ADULT body, IE average sized boobs, pubes, woman hips. Most characters in hentai, even if they're under 18 in the anime/manga, are depicted with adult features and could pass as adults. In true Lolicon and Shotacon, which depicts children under about 12-14, it's obvious they're underaged. Delicious flat chests or small mosquito boobs, no pubes, the bodies of children. No loli/shota is illegal in Japan, and strangely the molestation rate there is pretty low.

That's the thing about cub porn. Almost all of it depicts minors below about 14 years old. So it's not relevant to ask a 16 year old what he thinks of porn of say a 6 year old.


Also, would it make me pedo for me to have fapped to porn of Rei and Asuka? Because I have in the past and I might as well haul my ass to jail then. :B


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jul 31, 2010)

CrazyLee said:


> INB4 locked thread. I don't expect this to end well.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You need to lurk more in anime. I have seen plenty of porn pictures in anime depicting girls a lot younger than 14. I gave up looking at hentai because I was sick and tired of fucking seeing it.


----------



## Willow (Jul 31, 2010)

CrazyLee said:


> So it's not relevant to ask a 16 year old what he thinks of porn of say a 6 year old.


 How so? Who would you say we ask. A kid doesn't know what sex or porn is; so how would they be able to give a proper answer?


----------



## BlauShep (Jul 31, 2010)

17 year old here.
I think cub porn = child porn, and anyone who faps to it or even supports it is disguising.


----------



## Machine (Jul 31, 2010)

OP, why would you even want a teen's opinion on cub porn?


----------



## CannonFodder (Jul 31, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> You need to lurk more in anime. I have seen plenty of porn pictures in anime depicting girls a lot younger than 14. I gave up looking at hentai because I was sick and tired of fucking seeing it.


 There is some seriously sick shit in anime.
*shudders in horror remembering some of it*


----------



## Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs (Jul 31, 2010)

Cub porn is not okay. Most people here know it's not okay, because most of us on here know it's loophole for pedos.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs said:


> Cub porn is not okay. Most people here know it's not okay, because most of us on here know it's loophole for pedos.


 
If most of us on here knew it wasn't an ok thing, we wouldn't have so many fucking threads about CP.
This shit just needs to stop e.e


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> If most of us on here knew it wasn't an ok thing, we wouldn't have so many fucking threads about CP.
> This shit just needs to stop e.e


 
These threads also pop up on a regular basis.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> These threads also pop up on a regular basis.


 I know, it's annoying.
Like as much as I don't like CP.. I also don't need fifty thousand of the same thread with the same argument ON THE SAME PAGE.

Like really, what's the point?


----------



## Smelge (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Like really, what's the point?


 
Justifymykinkjustifymykinkjustifymykink


----------



## Machine (Jul 31, 2010)

Smelge said:


> Justifymykinkjustifymykinkjustifymykink


And find potential pedophiles to frolick with in the land of unpursecuted happiness.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Jul 31, 2010)

This reminds me of when I was a sex-starved teenager and I tried to think of a system that allow for teens to look at porn of people their own age.

Also its pretty laughable to assume that beating off to pictures of 12 year olds is okay if you're 16, or that for some reason being under the legal limit would allow one to look at child pornography, implied or otherwise, since people under 18 shouldn't even be looking at porn.

Furry fandom needs to take a harder stance and stop encouraging underage furs become sexually active and look at porn, in general.

My welcome back post is in a cub porn thread, awesome


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Jul 31, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> My welcome back post is in a cub porn thread, awesome



Isn't FAF just _fabulous_?


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Jul 31, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Isn't FAF just _fabulous_?


"Cyclical" is a better term, I think.


----------



## Lazarian (Jul 31, 2010)

I personally have no liking of underage fictional characters portrayed sexually, but at the same time I really have a problem with thoughtcrime. If adults want to roleplay underage characters having sex, or draw it on paper or whatever, then so be it. Just because I don't like the idea doesn't mean I have the moral right to say it should be banned and the artists jailed.

And as far as it being a "gateway" to people harming real kids, it's absolute bullshit. The gateway theory is ancient rhetoric from anti-drug lobbyists. If the theory held any water, beer would be a gateway drug to heroin. I kinda think it goes along the same lines of being "gay on paper": you hear lots of comments of people being turned on by gay furry art, but are outright repulsed by the idea of being with a guy in real life. Furry characters give a person that extra degree of separation from themselves, and it's probably a safe bet that most furries that like the cub stuff probably think real human kids are gross, and would never entertain the idea of actually doing something bad to one. There are exceptions, granted, but I don't think it's the norm.    

The biggest problem in the fandom with cub porn IMHO is it attracts all the fuckups who were already kiddie-diddlers in the first place (hi Allen Panda!), and the fandom is chock full of naive, easily manipulated kids who are easy targets for them.


----------



## Aleu (Aug 1, 2010)

I don't see why people are bitching about a victimless crime. The arguments are so fucking flawed it's pathetic.
"BAwww it's disgusting!" Well....so is scat/vore/snuff
"A child is a child!" No, it's a drawing depicting a child. Not an actual child
"It's illegal!" yeah? Well so is murder, drug use, bestiality but no one is calling a ban on those.
"It'll make pedos more likely to molest children!" Oh, really? Actually, that makes complete sense because banning something will TOTALLY make things better. It worked for the Prohibition...oh wait, NO IT DIDN'T. If anything, it makes things WORSE
Really, I think it's stupid that child porn is illegal to some degree. Yes, get rid of the stuff that contain actual children being abused. But if it's stuff like CGI or cartoons then WTF? Why? It's animation! It's not real!


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

The argument is fucking pointless.
Lock this stupid thread already, fuckkkkk.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

To all the people justifying why cub porn isn't wrong:

What if someone drew an extremely gory picture involving cubs being ripped in half or being killed?
Or raped?
Or shit/pissed on?

Or does that not really matter either because "HURP DURP IT'S NOT REAL!"


----------



## Aleu (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> To all the people justifying why cub porn isn't wrong:
> 
> What if someone drew an extremely gory picture involving cubs being ripped in half or being killed?
> Or raped?
> ...


 Yes, it wouldn't matter because HURP DERP IT'S NOT REAL!!!!!


----------



## Kiru-kun (Aug 1, 2010)

Holy Shit.. another one of these? taken all bets that this goes to 10 pages before ze' thread lock



by the by, Cub porn, no... just, fucking, no


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> I don't see why people are bitching about a victimless crime. The arguments are so fucking flawed it's pathetic.
> "BAwww it's disgusting!" Well....so is scat/vore/snuff
> "A child is a child!" No, it's a drawing depicting a child. Not an actual child
> "It's illegal!" yeah? Well so is murder, drug use, bestiality but no one is calling a ban on those.
> ...



Why do you care so much about people being offended by drawings of children in sexual situations?

Do you think the fandom is better off allowing cub porn?  Or that allowing/encouraging it doesn't also encourage pedophilia and pedophilies to join the fandom?


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> Yes, it wouldn't matter because HURP DERP IT'S NOT REAL!!!!!


 Anything depicting children in a sexual or otherwise graphic nature is disturbing in and of itself. 

Not because of the content, but because someone had to actually sit down, plan this out, and draw it. 
For their and other people's enjoyment. 

But oh yea, it's a drawing so why should I care?

Might be because seeing a child in a sexual situation is disturbing to me. Drawing or not.


----------



## FancySkunk (Aug 1, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> Yes, it wouldn't matter because HURP DERP IT'S NOT REAL!!!!!


To a point, I can agree with this. In the grand scheme of things, someone looking at a drawing isn't all that harmful. However, there is no data to prove or disprove whether or not having pedophilic art will increase or decrease the likelihood of someone acting on their desires. Arguably, whether or not there is artwork readily available, some pedophiles will act upon their urges in real life, and others won't. Thus, while I find the artwork conceptually sick; I just don't know if it's possible to directly link it to any real world harm.

I'd probably lean towards banning it here if it was my call, though. Having CP (and its viewers) and younger users on the same site just seems like a bad idea. That said, though, no matter what is done here, or on any other site, the artwork will still be circulated via more underground methods. Perhaps that's for the best though. When things are kept out of the mainstream, and the feeling that they are wrong is strongly upheld, at least some people interested in the subject material will be deterred from pursuing it.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

I wonder if anyone would have issues with* human* kids having sex together.
Being mutilated and ripped apart.
Being raped.
Being pissed on or shit on.
The examples Willow gave.

Cubs are based on children, so think of it as a human kid and not an animal.
It's disgusting.
It's morally wrong.


I just don't understand why people are saying there is absolutely nothing wrong with CP.
If there wasn't anything wrong with it, it wouldn't be illegal in certain areas of the world. :I


----------



## chocobaba (Aug 1, 2010)

(to gatorguts)
i partly agree and disagree on this, because yes, child porn IS wrong, and if furries existed it would be badly wrong, but this is mainly the artists opinion if they draw it or not, and it would be better if it stayed here, on artwork, and not reality.


----------



## Southpaw (Aug 1, 2010)

Legal or not its still child pornography....

anyone who likes child pornography is a sick basterd


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 1, 2010)

Southpaw said:


> Legal or not its still child pornography....
> 
> anyone who likes child pornography is a sick basterd


 
anyone who can't spell the word bastard shouldn't use it.
also, good job making your opinion the only right one.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> anyone who can't spell the word bastard shouldn't use it.
> also, good job making your opinion the only right one.


 
You basterd!
Bas.
TERD.


----------



## FancySkunk (Aug 1, 2010)

Southpaw said:


> anyone who likes child pornography is a sick basterd


So, people who like child pornography hunt and kill Nazis? Might be an acceptable trade-off. >_>


----------



## Airborne_Piggy (Aug 1, 2010)

Y'know what's disgusting AND real?
Forbidding a certain type of artwork because it doesn't fit your taste.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 1, 2010)

Airborne_Piggy said:


> Y'know what's disgusting AND real?
> Forbidding a certain type of artwork because it doesn't fit your taste.


 
this, pretty much. life and the internet is not all about you :V


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

Airborne_Piggy said:


> Y'know what's disgusting AND real?
> Forbidding a certain type of artwork because it doesn't fit your taste.


 
It's disgusting people need their daily dosage of child dick too.
and oh.
It's quite real.


----------



## chocobaba (Aug 1, 2010)

Airborne_Piggy said:


> Y'know what's disgusting AND real?
> Forbidding a certain type of artwork because it doesn't fit your taste.



amen, it aint like we can sit next to everybody while they draw stuff, let them post it, and if you dont like it, just avoid it, simple yes?


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 1, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> It's disgusting people need their daily dosage of child dick too.
> and oh.
> It's quite real.


 
i think it's disgusting that people need their daily dosage of sacks of fat porn. does that make it wrong?
i'm not justifying REAL CP, but goddamn. it's art.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> i think it's disgusting that people need their daily dosage of sacks of fat porn. does that make it wrong?
> i'm not justifying REAL CP, but goddamn. it's art.


 
You can't compare fat to a kid/cub.
:I

They're completely different.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 1, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> You can't compare fat to a kid/cub.
> :I
> 
> They're completely different.


 
when cub porn riots are all based on aesthetics, yes i can.
:I
it's all because it's "icky" in the end. if anyone sincerely thinks that drawn porn is a legitimate threat to the safety of children, they need to doused with cold water.


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 1, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> when cub porn riots are all based on aesthetics, yes i can.
> :I
> it's all because it's "icky" in the end. if anyone sincerely thinks that drawn porn is a legitimate threat to the safety of children, they need to doused with cold water.


 it may not be dangerous but for those in the UK...it is. its cause their government decided "ANYTHING THAT IS A CHILD HAVING SEX IS WRONG M'KAY"

but these days every time someone bitches about Cub Porn, betawolf commissions 3 more drawings raping cubs


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 1, 2010)

Crysix Fousen said:


> it may not be dangerous but for those in the UK...it is. its cause their government decided "ANYTHING THAT IS A CHILD HAVING SEX IS WRONG M'KAY"
> 
> but these days every time someone bitches about Cub Porn, betawolf commissions 3 more drawings raping cubs


 
and SOMEHOW furries get up every day without any repercussions...


----------



## Hateful Bitch (Aug 1, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> when cub porn riots are all based on aesthetics, yes i can.
> :I
> it's all because it's "icky" in the end. if anyone sincerely thinks that drawn porn is a legitimate threat to the safety of children, they need to doused with cold water.


 Agreed.

I think cub porn is disgusting but so what. They're just cartoons.


----------



## chocobaba (Aug 1, 2010)

Crysix Fousen said:


> it may not be dangerous but for those in the UK...it is. its cause their government decided "ANYTHING THAT IS A CHILD HAVING SEX IS WRONG M'KAY"
> 
> but these days every time someone bitches about Cub Porn, betawolf commissions 3 more drawings raping cubs



damn, he must be a busy artist then.


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 1, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> and SOMEHOW furries get up every day without any repercussions...


 but those in UK in fear of jail time for having cub porn :V


chocobaba said:


> damn, he must be a busy artist then.


 He has money


----------



## chocobaba (Aug 1, 2010)

Crysix Fousen said:


> He has money



ohh, that makes sense... why are people arguing about this? just respect the artist, he has enough guts to draw and post stuff like it, he atleast deserves good critiques on its wellness, not people bickering about, its illegal in reality :l


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 1, 2010)

chocobaba said:


> ohh, that makes sense... why are people arguing about this? just respect the artist, he has enough guts to draw and post stuff like it, he atleast deserves good critiques on its wellness, not people bickering about, its illegal in reality :l


 I really dont care, I only came in saying "In the UK its illegal actually"


----------



## Fenrari (Aug 1, 2010)

I'll admit to fapping to Cub porn once in a while...

Meh judge me if you want to I don't really care. Wolfblade is a good artist as is Inuki and Shiuk. If liking their art is wrong, so be it I'm wrong.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 1, 2010)

Fenrari said:


> I'll admit to fapping to Cub porn once in a while...
> 
> Meh judge me if you want to I don't really care. Wolfblade is a good artist as is Inuki and Shiuk. If liking their art is wrong, so be it I'm wrong.


 
prepare for intense trolling :C


----------



## Kellie Gator (Aug 1, 2010)

Fenrari said:


> I'll admit to fapping to Cub porn once in a while...
> 
> Meh judge me if you want to I don't really care. Wolfblade is a good artist as is Inuki and Shiuk. If liking their art is wrong, so be it I'm wrong.


 But those artists are terrible. :[


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 1, 2010)

Kellie Gator said:


> But those artists are terrible. :[


 
i don't know what the one that i like is... he's the one that did the "oh brother!" comic. dunno who that is.


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 1, 2010)

Kellie Gator said:


> But those artists are terrible. :[


 days later commission Inuki an art peice...I felt horrible...but at least my ex girlfriend have a nice bag


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

Fenrari said:


> I'll admit to fapping to Cub porn once in a while...
> 
> Meh judge me if you want to I don't really care. Wolfblade is a good artist as is Inuki and Shiuk. If liking their art is wrong, so be it I'm wrong.


 This isn't news. 



gatorguts said:


> I wonder if anyone would have issues with* human* kids having sex together.
> Being mutilated and ripped apart.
> Being raped.
> Being pissed on or shit on.
> ...


Oh but no, the difference between those two is that "HERP DERP IT ISN'T REAL"
So you obviously can't relate it to real kids being in the same situations at all.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

I just feel that costs outweigh the benefits of allowing cub porn.  We gain..what?  Some art featuring child sex (of which there are only a few decent artists or pieces and the rest being things drawn by people who should not be drawing porn at all) and reinforce the pervasive "rule" of furry that anything and everything should be allowed and one should not be judged for one's preferences and fetishes, no matter how messed up the person is.

While adults who view cub porn are not likely to develop new urges to have sexual contact with children, we do have furs who are young teens, and are highly impressionable.  They are in the stages of budding sexual development.  That they came to furry _usually_ (not always) suggests that they might have issues at school or with friends and are likely to be outcasts in their social circle.  They pursue furry for escape and acceptance.  And as a fandom, we encourage these furs to become sexually active and to pursue deviance, as the furry culture is one, essentially, of "free love."  We have a prime example right on the forums!  How much sexual material and language has been pushed toward Willow since she joined?  She handles it well (I think), but it's still pretty awful that so many people are being so suggestive toward an open minor.

So we have these sexually starved furs who are told to fuck as much as they can but can't get laid (and probably shouldn't)...and then we have scores of art sexualizing their youth, and their ignorance in relationships and sex, which gives them desperately needed validation.  This is not healthy.  Because these types ALSO have a much harder time separating reality from fiction because of their immaturity, they are more likely to take depictions of pedophilia and associate it with real life urges, either later developing urges toward children or by actively pursuing sexual relationships with older men and women.  

By being accepting of cub porn, by the way, we make actual pedophiles more comfortable and feel welcome.  It validates and reinforces their urges, even if the item does not necessarily cause those urges.  Don't think of it as the object having a cause-and-effect relationship, but the implications of allowing the material and what that signals to the person.

To summarize:
Cub porn, in an objective sense, is harmless fantasy that, while a little gross, isn't wrong or bad.
Cub porn, in a fandom that is already encouraging sexual activity in youth, has serious implications and could be very dangerous.

If I believed the fandom itself was mature enough to handle it, I'd have no problem with cub porn being allowed.  I don't think we are.


----------



## Aleu (Aug 1, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> Why do you care so much about people being offended by drawings of children in sexual situations?
> 
> Do you think the fandom is better off allowing cub porn?  Or that allowing/encouraging it doesn't also encourage pedophilia and pedophilies to join the fandom?


I think the fandom would be better off taking a big cup of shut the fuck up about it. They're raising hell about drawings. What. The. Fuck?



Willow said:


> Anything depicting children in a sexual or otherwise graphic nature is disturbing in and of itself.
> 
> Not because of the content, but because someone had to actually sit down, plan this out, and draw it.
> For their and other people's enjoyment.
> ...


So we should ban movies that depict children or animals getting mutilated or raped because it's BAAAAD too. No, it doesn't matter if it's not real because it's BAAAAAD.



FancySkunk said:


> To a point, I can agree with this. In the grand scheme of things, someone looking at a drawing isn't all that harmful. However, there is no data to prove or disprove whether or not having pedophilic art will increase or decrease the likelihood of someone acting on their desires. Arguably, whether or not there is artwork readily available, some pedophiles will act upon their urges in real life, and others won't. Thus, while I find the artwork conceptually sick; I just don't know if it's possible to directly link it to any real world harm.
> 
> I'd probably lean towards banning it here if it was my call, though. Having CP (and its viewers) and younger users on the same site just seems like a bad idea. That said, though, no matter what is done here, or on any other site, the artwork will still be circulated via more underground methods. Perhaps that's for the best though. When things are kept out of the mainstream, and the feeling that they are wrong is strongly upheld, at least some people interested in the subject material will be deterred from pursuing it.


 That's where my prohibition point comes in. Also, with all the porn in the fandom (even non-pedophilic) I don't see how this is remotely close to a kids site. Even if the rules say "PG-13". 13 is usually hitting the puberty stage which wouldn't make them a target for pedophiles.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> So we should ban movies that depict children or animals getting mutilated or raped because it's BAAAAD too. No, it doesn't matter if it's not real because it's BAAAAAD.


But the children are real. Oh, does that not matter too, because it's not really happening?

That's pretty disturbing.


----------



## Aleu (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> But the children are real. Oh, does that not matter too, because it's not really happening?
> 
> That's pretty disturbing.


 It shouldn't bother people if it's NOT REAL. That's why movies have that little disclaimer thing "No *insert whatever thing here* was harmed in the making of this movie" to assure people that* IT'S NOT REAL!*
There is a DIFFERENCE between drawings and actual living things. The difference is that drawings are NOT LIVING THINGS.




Van Ishikawa said:


> To summarize:
> Cub porn, in an objective sense, is harmless fantasy that, while a little gross, isn't wrong or bad.
> Cub  porn, in a fandom that is already encouraging sexual activity in youth,  has serious implications and could be very dangerous.
> 
> If I  believed the fandom itself was mature enough to handle it, I'd have no  problem with cub porn being allowed.  I don't think we are.


 You do realize that the media also has this problem with pushing sex everywhere it can, right?


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> It shouldn't bother people if it's NOT REAL. That's why movies have that little disclaimer thing "No *insert whatever thing here* was harmed in the making of this movie" to assure people that* IT'S NOT REAL!*
> There is a DIFFERENCE between drawings and actual living things. The difference is that drawings are NOT LIVING THINGS.


 Okay, and no adults were harmed in the making of films either, though a lot of people I know really hate movies that are only fueled by pointless torture. 

Reassure all you want, people know it's not real, though people really don't care. A child. Is a child. Is a child. Is a child. That's all it will ever be. 
I guess you're pretty desensitized to this kinda shit I guess so you can just brush it off and laugh at people who think it's awful. 

You kinda make yourself look like an ass that way though. 

Also, quit trying to impose bullshit reasons on others as to why it's not disturbing.


----------



## Aleu (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> Okay, and no adults were harmed in the making of films either, though a lot of people I know really hate movies that are only fueled by pointless torture.
> 
> Reassure all you want, people know it's not real, though people really don't care. A child. Is a child. Is a child. Is a child. That's all it will ever be.
> I guess you're pretty desensitized to this kinda shit I guess so you can just brush it off and laugh at people who think it's awful.
> ...


 I hate pointless torture in movies but that's only because most of the time, it doesn't add to the plot. Sure, cool, graphics and all but why?

I really don't see how a drawing is a child. I really don't. If it was an actual video of whatever then yes, it's bad because it actually involves HARM. Drawings do not have feelings, they aren't real, they aren't going to get hurt at all. It's a drawing and that's all that it will ever be.

Also, quite trying to impose bullshit reasons as to why it is disturbing. Don't like it? Don't partake in it.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> I hate pointless torture in movies but that's only because most of the time, it doesn't add to the plot.


 How does dismembering or raping a child add to a plot? Oh, I guess because the main character has a new reason to find the killer. 

'kay, carry on then.


----------



## Tally (Aug 1, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> I hate pointless torture in movies but that's only because most of the time, it doesn't add to the plot. Sure, cool, graphics and all but why?


 
I recommend the Saw movies for you then.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

Tally said:


> I recommend the Saw movies for you then.


 I recommend the Collector and Hostel. Better.

Saw apparently had a plot behind the torture, so it's not completely random. 
Hostel was about organ harvesting I believe and the Collector is just awful.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> I think the fandom would be better off taking a big cup of shut the fuck up about it. They're raising hell about drawings. What. The. Fuck?


The entire fandom is about drawings, so yeah its kindof a big deal as it's how we express and communicate with one another.  If so many people are upset by it, it must be an important issue.  If the content of the drawings are not important to you, then what is your stake in whether or not cub porn is allowed on sites like FA?  You're getting agitated by people discussing the content of art.  You're raising hell about drawings.  Do you recognize this?


> So we should ban movies that depict children or animals getting mutilated or raped because it's BAAAAD too. No, it doesn't matter if it's not real because it's BAAAAAD.


  I can't think of a single movie that contains child or animal abuse where the abuser does not suffer consequences or the consequences of those actions on the children are not explored, and they are always negative.  Porn featuring children being molested or raped leave out such details and present sex with minors in a favorable light.

The horror/gore movie example is also covered by this:  the killers are either punished for their crimes and atrocities committed, or are presented in a way that makes them devoid of any humanity whatsoever and beyond the rules of justice that society has laid out.  They are monsters, demons, and aliens that humanity is powerless to control or defeat.


> That's where my prohibition point comes in. Also, with all the porn in the fandom (even non-pedophilic) I don't see how this is remotely close to a kids site. Even if the rules say "PG-13". 13 is usually hitting the puberty stage which wouldn't make them a target for pedophiles.


While the term pedophile actually refers specifically to those attracted to children within a certain age range that excludes teens, for discussions of this nature it goes by a more common definition of anyone attracted to or pursuing relationships with those under the legal age limit.  Sex between an 18 year old and a 16 year old is "less wrong" than an 18 year old and a 12 year old, but both are still illegal and immoral acts and we institute a strict age limit because everyone matures differently and we need to enforce an objective standard.  Just because someone is going through puberty does not mean they are now excluded from being pursued by deviants.

In addition, yes this is a heavily sexual-oriented fandom, but we still have furs as young as 12 joining in and trying to meet people.  A major problem I have with the fandom is that because of the separation of the actual age and perceived age, thanks to the internet, we quickly forget the true age and act as we do normally, offering sexual favors to those too immature to handle it.  I addressed most of this in my previous post.  If the site says it's PG-13, it should adjust itself to be appropriate for that demographic.





AleutheWolf said:


> It shouldn't bother people if it's NOT REAL. That's why movies have that little disclaimer thing "No *insert whatever thing here* was harmed in the making of this movie" to assure people that* IT'S NOT REAL!*
> There is a DIFFERENCE between drawings and actual living things. The difference is that drawings are NOT LIVING THINGS.


The drawings don't appear out of nowhere and aren't appreciated by non-living things, and just because something is not real does not mean it has no impact on the lives of real people.  You cannot depict a graphic rape scene on TV and excuse it through not being real.

The fact that art can incite emotion within a person is reason alone for this argument to be invalidated.


> You do realize that the media also has this problem with pushing sex everywhere it can, right?


Of course.  And this is another problem, so saying it happens in other media does not justify it here.  The fandom has this cranked up to 11, and for a real world media hypothetical, is like having PBS and 99 channels of Cinemax after dark on TV.  The most popular people in the fandom are the ones who draw the most/best porn and those that commission the most porn of themselves


----------



## Ikrit (Aug 1, 2010)

if two 15 year olds wanted  to fuck each other
i'd let them
but if they decided to make porn movies....
welll....i'll let the people decide


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

This argument is getting no where.
We have an equal amount of supporters and haters.

Can't we just drop it already? You're wasting your time on an argument that will get no where.

This shit isn't going to be banned on the site anytime soon unless the US government bans it.
So why are we bothering :I


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> This argument is getting no where.
> We have an equal amount of supporters and haters.
> 
> Can't we just drop it already? You're wasting your time on an argument that will get no where.
> ...


Um

Why discuss anything ever then?


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 1, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> This argument is getting no where.
> We have an equal amount of supporters and haters.
> 
> Can't we just drop it already? You're wasting your time on an argument that will get no where.
> ...


 Thats what I said a while back, this site exist in the US, thus we follow US laws. if the US becomes just like the UK, congrats you got your cub porn banned, till then shut up about it, and go about how the fandom works "Hating each other base one what we like"


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> Um
> 
> Why discuss anything ever then?


 That's not what i'm getting at.
I'm getting that this topic is a dead horse. There have been numerous threads about it and I jsut don't understand why.

Nobody on either side is getting anywhere so why bother?
*This. Is. A. Dead. Horse. Topic.*



Crysix Fousen said:


> Thats what I said a while back, this site exist in the US, thus we follow US laws. if the US becomes just like the UK, congrats you got your cub porn banned, till then shut up about it, and go about how the fandom works "Hating each other base one what we like"


 Exactly. I'm not for cub porn, but like.. why are we arguing anymore. There is no point because nothing will change until the government changes it.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> That's not what i'm getting at.
> I'm getting that this topic is a dead horse. There have been numerous threads about it and I jsut don't understand why.
> 
> Nobody on either side is getting anywhere so why bother?
> ...


 It's obviously an important issue among people.  debate and argument is not about convincing the other person that you are right or in most cases to even reach a common agreement.  They are for the benefit of the undecided third party to review and learn from the discussion and formulate their own opinion.  Healthcare is a dead horse topic.  Immigration is a dead horse topic.  There is no point because nothing will change until the government changes it.

I understand, for example, threads of this nature being duplicated across forums (there is another one for the same topic in R&R) or having multiple threads in the same forum.  However, one thread for it is not detrimental to the site as a whole and I feel it is important to discuss an issue as volatile as this.  If you are tired of seeing it, you don't have to enter the thread.


----------



## Ratte (Aug 1, 2010)

Ugh, fuck.

Cub porn is just a fucking drawing.  Does it depict an actual child?  No?  Then shut up.  For all you know the "child" could be thousands of years old and is kept in a child-like form by some kind of sick magic of some such shit.  It's fictional.  Stop overthinking furry garbage, god damn.

brb casting spells and trying to drive a fucking flying van because I watched/read harry potter


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

Ratte said:


> Ugh, fuck.
> 
> Cub porn is just a fucking drawing.  Does it depict an actual child?  No?  Then shut up.  For all you know the "child" could be thousands of years old and is kept in a child-like form by some kind of sick magic of some such shit.  It's fictional.  Stop overthinking furry garbage, god damn.


That opens another interesting question on if the importance should be placed upon the perceived age or the actual age (as far as actual age can be assigned for a fictional character). 


> brb casting spells and trying to drive a fucking flying van because I watched/read Harry Pothead


This happened, people thought they were actually wizards.  Along with the story of the kids who thought they were werewolves, and covens of witches, and people claiming they're vampires, ect.  People are stupid and impressionable, and while we enjoy mocking, this can be incredibly dangerous.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> That opens another interesting question on if the importance should be placed upon the perceived age or the actual age (as far as actual age can be assigned for a fictional character).


 Don't people use that though sometimes?

"Is that man fucking a child?"
NO THAT CHARACTER IS REALLY 20 TOO!!
"Suuuuure"


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> Don't people use that though sometimes?
> 
> "Is that man fucking a child?"
> NO THAT CHARACTER IS REALLY 20 TOO!!
> "Suuuuure"


Yep, they do.  it's actually quite amusing for things like imported H-games from Japan, where the obviously underaged protagonist is said to have just had his 18th birthday, then hooks up with his younger sister that same day.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

Ratte said:


> Ugh, fuck.
> 
> Cub porn is just a fucking drawing.  Does it depict an actual child?  No?  Then shut up.  For all you know the "child" could be thousands of years old and is kept in a child-like form by some kind of sick magic of some such shit.  It's fictional.  Stop overthinking furry garbage, god damn.I'm also 17.



Usually the artist does give a back ground to their characters. But more often or not cub porn is just that, cub porn, no reason behind apart from being porn.



Willow said:


> Don't people use that though sometimes?
> 
> "Is that man fucking a child?"
> NO THAT CHARACTER IS REALLY 20 TOO!!
> "Suuuuure"



This reminded me of a time when two people were banned from SL because one had an adult looking avatar and one had a child looking avatar. The player was an adult and the character was of age, but the lindens obviously don't like the fact it was a child like avatar. And I do believe they ban anyone else doing such a thing, now.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> This reminded me of a time when two people were banned from SL because one had an adult looking avatar and one had a child looking avatar. The player was an adult and the character was of age, but the lindens obviously don't like the fact it was a child like avatar. And I do believe they ban anyone else doing such a thing, now.


 Were they trying to get into the Teen Zone? That would explain it.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> Were they trying to get into the Teen Zone? That would explain it.



I don't think they were. I believe they were in the adult section. But it was the fact that the avatar was depicting a child was the reason the lindens banned it. Deemed it unacceptable.

I believe it was also done publicly, I believe someone reported it to the lindens.


----------



## Superscooter143 (Aug 1, 2010)

I'm 15 and I'm going to say alternative to pedophilia.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

Superscooter143 said:


> I'm 15 and I'm going to say alternative to pedophilia.



That doesn't justify it.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

Superscooter143 said:


> I'm 15 and I'm going to say alternative to pedophilia.


 


RandyDarkshade said:


> That doesn't justify it.


 This

Arguing this statement is stupid. 

Did anyone ever think that maybe we don't like having the porn plastered all over FA? So should we just stop using FA then if we don't like it?


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> This
> 
> Arguing this statement is stupid.
> 
> Did anyone ever think that maybe we don't like having the porn plastered all over FA? So should we just stop using FA then if we don't like it?


to be fair, you can disable this.

Though why the OP wanted teens to comment...either he purposely wanted the opinion of those who are less mature/more ignorant on a sensitive subject or was cruising for teens who thought being banged by older guys was cool.


----------



## Superscooter143 (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> This
> 
> Arguing this statement is stupid.
> 
> Did anyone ever think that maybe we don't like having the porn plastered all over FA? So should we just stop using FA then if we don't like it?


 

http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=4164486


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

Superscooter143 said:


> http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=4164486


 Can you support it at all?


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> This
> 
> Arguing this statement is stupid.
> 
> Did anyone ever think that maybe we don't like having the porn plastered all over FA? So should we just stop using FA then if we don't like it?



Naa, if I stumble3 across something I dislike I just move on to something else. Complaining about it never solves it anyway.



Van Ishikawa said:


> to be fair, you can disable this.
> 
> Though why the OP wanted teens to comment...either he purposely wanted the opinion of those who are less mature/more ignorant on a sensitive subject or was cruising for teens who thought being banged by older guys was cool.



A lot of artists tend to use a warning thumbnail.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

Superscooter143 said:


> http://objection.mrdictionary.net/go.php?n=4164486


 Okay and?

You wanna back up your claim there Godot?


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> Okay and?
> 
> You wanna back up your claim there Godot?



It's a noob, it probably doesn't even know what is being discussed in this thread.


----------



## Superscooter143 (Aug 1, 2010)

What? So, I can't believe in my own opinions? I don't have to prove my own belief to you, but if it was a fact, then yes I would have to.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

Superscooter143 said:


> What? So, I can't believe in my own opinions? i don't have to prove my own belief to you, but if it was a fact, then yes I would have to.


 So you support something for no reason other than "I think its okay"?  Finding cub porn acceptable is an opinion, certainly, but opinions have to form somewhere.  It is not a "belief," unless for some reason your religion deems cub porn acceptable.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

Superscooter143 said:


> What? So, I can't believe in my own opinions? I don't have to prove my own belief to you, but if it was a fact, then yes I would have to.


 Evidence is everything.

So how is this an alternative? Since that's your belief.


----------



## Superscooter143 (Aug 1, 2010)

I never said it was okay. Note to self: you can't force people to explain themselves.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> So you support something for no reason other than "I think its okay"?  Finding cub porn acceptable is an opinion, certainly, but opinions have to form somewhere.  It is not a "belief," unless for some reason your religion deems cub porn acceptable.



I say he's a pedophile, who's with me?


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

Superscooter143 said:


> I never said it was okay. Note to self: you can't force people to explain themselves.



You objected to willow being against cub porn, then you say you never said it was okay? then WTF are you saying?


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

Superscooter143 said:


> I never said it was okay. Note to self: you can't force people to explain themselves.


Come into thread, post a one sentence view, absolutely refuse to expound about it when requested, play a victim when people call you out for it.  With all this effort, you could have elaborated on your view in a less douchey manner.


----------



## mowgly (Aug 1, 2010)

Wow I thought this would be free of furry drama,  if people have problems with pedophiles get a job as a cop  or detective and go hunt pedophiles instead of just saying ' I don't like this it's wrong '  I bet most of you's don't do anything either than saying it. 

By the way pedophiles don't have cure ,  they always have those desires, that doesn't make them bad people, when they act upon those sexual desires it's completely wrong.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> You objected to willow being against cub porn, then you say you never said it was okay? then WTF are you saying?


 That CP is an alternative to pedophilia. Which is kinda like saying "it's not wrong"

So he contradicted self, *OBJECTION!*


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> Come into thread, post a one sentence view, absolutely refuse to expound about it when requested, play a victim when people call you out for it.  With all this effort, you could have elaborated on your view in a less douchey manner.



Actually he posted before that. Top of this page I believe. but he can never answer anyone when they call him out on his opinions.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> Wow I thought this would be free of furry drama,  if people have problems with pedophiles get a job as a cop  or detective and go hunt pedophiles instead of just saying ' I don't like this it's wrong '  I bet most of you's don't do anything either than saying it.
> 
> By the way pedophiles don't have cure ,  they always have those desires, that doesn't make them bad people, when they act upon those sexual desires it's completely wrong.



If we shut up and said nothing pedophiles will then believe it is an accepted thing to do. by speaking out against pedophiles we show it is NOT accepted and WONT be tolerated.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> Wow I thought this would be free of furry drama,  if people have problems with pedophiles get a job as a cop  or detective and go hunt pedophiles instead of just saying ' I don't like this it's wrong '  I bet most of you's don't do anything either than saying it.


This is the worst fucking argument.  



> By the way pedophiles don't have cure ,  they always have those desires, that doesn't make them bad people, when they act upon those sexual desires it's completely wrong.


provide evidence it can never be rectified, and also give a reason why having cub porn is a gain for the fandom or FA.


----------



## Ames (Aug 1, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> Though why the OP wanted teens to comment...either he purposely wanted the opinion of those who are less mature/more ignorant on a sensitive subject or was cruising for teens who thought being banged by older guys was cool.


 
Pretty much the impression I was getting from the OP's posts.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> Wow I thought this would be free of furry drama,  if people have problems with pedophiles get a job as a cop  or detective and go hunt pedophiles instead of just saying ' I don't like this it's wrong '  I bet most of you's don't do anything either than saying it.


Ummm, yea sure...



mowgly said:


> By the way pedophiles don't have cure ,  they always have those desires, that doesn't make them bad people, when they act upon those sexual desires it's completely wrong.


So we'll give 'em drawn porn to exacerbate their fetish!


----------



## Loomy (Aug 1, 2010)

This thread isn't locked yet?

Debating anything over the internet is just a waste of time.  No one will ever change their opinions, and the less you think through your opinion the better off you will be.

Debates should only take place when you risk getting kicked in the nuts for being a fucking idiot.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

Loomy said:


> Debating anything over the internet is just a waste of time.


 So is being on the internet period. 

Also, let's delete R&R now because most of the threads turn into arguments.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

Loomy said:


> This thread isn't locked yet?
> 
> Debating anything over the internet is just a waste of time.  No one will ever change their opinions, and the less you think through your opinion the better off you will be.
> 
> Debates should only take place when you risk getting kicked in the nuts for being a fucking idiot.


 
"The internet should only be used the way I think.  Also violence solves my problems."


----------



## Superscooter143 (Aug 1, 2010)

Loomy said:


> This thread isn't locked yet?
> 
> Debating anything over the internet is just a waste of time.  No one will ever change their opinions, and the less you think through your opinion the better off you will be.
> 
> Debates should only take place when you risk getting kicked in the nuts for being a fucking idiot.


 

u mad?


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> So is being on the internet period.
> 
> Also, let's delete R&R now because most of the threads turn into arguments.


 
R&R should become a heavily moderated debate and discussion area.


----------



## mowgly (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> Ummm, yea sure...
> 
> 
> So we'll give 'em drawn porn to exacerbate their fetish!


 


it ain't gonna make any diference,  you have to solve the problem, if you make the sympthom disapear  you just won't know that bad stuff is happening everywhere,  I bet you don't give a shit about kids being harmed, you just don't want to know that it's happening.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> I bet you don't give a shit about kids being harmed, you just don't want to know that it's happening.


 This is a horrible assumption. 

Sexual abuse, let alone any abuse isn't okay. Discipline's different. 
Taking advantage of a child because you can? That's not right at all.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> it ain't gonna make any diference,  you have to solve the problem, if you make the sympthom disapear  you just won't know that bad stuff is happening everywhere,  I bet you don't give a shit about kids being harmed, you just don't want to know that it's happening.


 
So...are you a police officer?  Otherwise you want children to be raped.
Are you a firefighter?  Otherwise you want houses to burn down.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> it ain't gonna make any diference,  you have to solve the problem, if you make the sympthom disapear  you just won't know that bad stuff is happening everywhere,  I bet you don't give a shit about kids being harmed, you just don't want to know that it's happening.



Stop posting, now.


----------



## mowgly (Aug 1, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> So...are you a police officer?  Otherwise you want children to be raped.
> Are you a firefighter?  Otherwise you want houses to burn down.


 
That's what you deduced I didn't say it. Saying your against cub porn is diferent from being against it, some people just scream a bit too much and do nothing about it, get angered about it and do nothing, they could use their time in something else is what I'm sayin'. or something like starting a vote against cub porn on FA


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> That's what you deduced I didn't say it. Saying your against cub porn is diferent from being against it, some people just scream a bit too much and do nothing about it, get angered about it and do nothing, they could use their time in something else is what I'm sayin'


 
What should people do, then?  I'm against pedophilia.  Duh.  So...should I become some kind of pedo-hunting Goddamn Batman?


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> Saying your against cub porn is diferent from being against it


 ..I'm having a hard time reading this. Oh yea, and what you're implying is that if you're not a cop/detective, you don't really care about kids being harmed.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> That's what you deduced I didn't say it. Saying your against cub porn is diferent from being against it, some people just scream a bit too much and do nothing about it, get angered about it and do nothing, they could use their time in something else is what I'm sayin'. or something like starting a vote against cub porn on FA



Voting against it on FA won't do anything either. Besides we are all entitled to our opinions, if we wish to yell out we don't like it, we can do so. As I said before it shows that society will not tolerate that sort of thing.


----------



## mowgly (Aug 1, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> What should people do, then?  I'm against pedophilia.  Duh.  So...should I become some kind of pedo-hunting Goddamn Batman?


 
Not necesarly, I said most, not all, if someone feels offended by it maybe the want an argue or something.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> Saying your against cub porn is diferent from being against it.



What the fuck does that even mean? If you say you're against it YOU'RE FUCKING AGAINST IT.



mowgly said:


> starting a vote against cub porn on FA


Lmao, you can't just 'start a vote' on something like this.
Unless the American Government bans cub porn/simulated child porn, there isn't going to be a stop to it on FA. :I


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> Not necesarly, I said most, not all, if someone feels offended by it maybe the want an argue or something.



Your posts are the dumbest posts I have read in a long time.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> Voting against it on FA won't do anything either. Besides we are all entitled to our opinions, if we wish to yell out we don't like it, we can do so. As I said before it shows that society will not tolerate that sort of thing.


 Pretty much. 

Unless they can link someone molesting children to looking at, saving, and printing off dozens of cub/loli/shota pictures, the US won't make it illegal really.
Unlike where bestiality is illegal in several states because it really did kill someone. Though they didn't look at pictures of it, as far as I know. With that being said though, zoophilia pictures, art, and videos aren't banned. There's no connection.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> Unlike where bestiality is illegal in several states because it really did kill someone.


 
Oh, I remember that episode of A 1000 Ways to Die where that drunk furry ran off into the woods and tried to sex up a bear. :V


----------



## mowgly (Aug 1, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> Your posts are the dumbest posts I have read in a long time.


 
lol, thank you. Maybe you didn't even try to understand, but whatever. Yes I was trying to stir things up a bit, heh heh heh.


----------



## Ames (Aug 1, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Oh, I remember that episode of A 1000 Ways to Die where that drunk furry ran off into the woods and tried to sex up a bear. :V


 
Haha I laughed so hard during that episode.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> Yes I was trying to stir things up a bit, heh heh heh.


 That was quite noticeable since you joined just to post on this thread.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> Maybe you didn't even try to understand, but whatever.


 Maybe it's because your posts don't even make sense or can barely be read.


----------



## mowgly (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> Pretty much.
> 
> Unless they can link someone molesting children to looking at, saving, and printing off dozens of cub/loli/shota pictures, the US won't make it illegal really.
> Unlike where bestiality is illegal in several states because it really did kill someone. Though they didn't look at pictures of it, as far as I know. With that being said though, zoophilia pictures, art, and videos aren't banned. There's no connection.



And what about the administration thoughts?  Can it be banned just because a lot of people ask for it?. Their must be a way people could do something about it. if there's no way better to just think about other things right. Anyone believe about law of atracction? things will just get worse, if you think things are wrong,  that's why it's better to just act on something because you don't want 'this' or 'that' to happen.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> And what about the administration thoughts?  Can it be banned just because a lot of people ask for it?. Their must be a way people could do something about it.


 
This isn't one of those petition things. They don't work.
It wont be banned unless the American government bans it.
What do you not understand about that?


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> And what about the administration thoughts?  Can it be banned just because a lot of people ask for it?. Their must be a way people could do something about it. if there's no way better to just think about other things right. Anyone believe about law of atracction? things will just get worse, if you think things are wrong,  that's why it's better to just act on something because you don't want 'this' or 'that' to happen.



Lets just say you stand a better chance at winning the jackpot on the lotto than getting FA admins to remove and ban all cub porn. Trust me on this.


----------



## mowgly (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> Maybe it's because your posts don't even make sense or can barely be read.


 
Damn, guess I have to practice my english, I'm from chile.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> And what about the administration thoughts?  Can it be banned just because a lot of people ask for it?. Their must be a way people could do something about it. if there's no way better to just think about other things right. Anyone believe about law of atracction? things will just get worse, if you think things are wrong,  that's why it's better to just act on something because you don't want 'this' or 'that' to happen.


 Seeing as how FA is only going by US laws, if the US bans it, FA would ban it. Loli and shota are banned from the site though if it's sexual in content. 
Same difference. 



mowgly said:


> Damn, guess I have to practice my english, I'm from chile.


So then your posts will be easier to read and still make zero sense.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> Seeing as how FA is only going by US laws, if the US bans it, FA would ban it. Loli and shota are banned from the site though if it's sexual in content.
> Same difference.



I obviously know something no one else knows.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I obviously know something no one else knows.


 Secrets are for quitters.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Secrets are for quitters.



Some secrets are best kept to one's self.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I obviously know something no one else knows.


 What is this then?


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I obviously know something no one else knows.


 
Dragoneer likes little boys :O!!!!!

((no not really.  I hope.))


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> What is this then?



VVVVVV



RandyDarkshade said:


> Some secrets are best kept to one's self.


----------



## mowgly (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> Seeing as how FA is only going by US laws, if the US bans it, FA would ban it. Loli and shota are banned from the site though if it's sexual in content.
> Same difference.
> 
> 
> So then your posts will be easier to read and still make zero sense.


 

lol I'm ''special''


----------



## Corwin Cross (Aug 1, 2010)

Case in point: If you derive any pleasure from cub porn, you're a pedophile. You don't have to be a child rapist to be a pedophile. By definition, it's anyone with an attraction to anyone underage. It's not art. It's the work of sick people trying to fulfill their sick fetishes. Case closed, no need for further discussion.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

Grand Salamander said:


> Case in point: If you derive any pleasure from cub porn, you're a pedophile. You don't have to be a child rapist to be a pedophile. By definition, it's anyone with an attraction to anyone underage. It's not art. It's the work of sick people trying to fulfill their sick fetishes. Case closed, no need for further discussion.


 I like you. :U


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

mowgly said:


> lol I'm ''spethull''



<.<


----------



## Airborne_Piggy (Aug 1, 2010)

Grand Salamander said:


> Case in point: If you derive any pleasure from cub porn, you're a pedophile. You don't have to be a child rapist to be a pedophile. By definition, it's anyone with an attraction to anyone underage. It's not art. It's the work of sick people trying to fulfill their sick fetishes. Case closed, no need for further discussion.


 
Actually there's a fine line between paraphilia and fetish.


----------



## derpdragon (Aug 1, 2010)

I'm 17, my dad was arrested when I was 13 for having REAL child porn. (Non of me or anything just traded pics and what not) Even than I still see nothing wrong with cub/loli/shota/ect. It's just a imaginary character, if it keeps a real pedo from actually going out and finding the real stuff I think it's 100% fine.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

derpdragon said:


> I'm 17, my dad was arrested when I was 13 for having REAL child porn. (Non of me or anything just traded pics and what not) Even than I still see nothing wrong with cub/loli/shota/ect. It's just a imaginary character, if it keeps a real pedo from actually going out and finding the real stuff I think it's 100% fine.


 Said this in the other thread in R&R:  there's no evidence it works like this, and even if there was, if fictional child porn is all that is keeping a person from looking at realp child porn or abusing children, that person needs help.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> Said this in the other thread in R&R:  there's no evidence it works like this, and even if there was, if fictional child porn is all that is keeping a person from looking at realp child porn or abusing children, that person needs help.


 But according to skittle, there are some therapists who redirect their patients to their perversion in fictional form. Which doesn't exactly make sense. 

That's like redirecting a person with murderous intent to violent video game and gore pics.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> But according to skittle, there are some therapists who redirect their patients to their perversion in fictional form. Which doesn't exactly make sense.
> 
> That's like redirecting a person with murderous intent to violent video game and gore pics.


if it is deemed a valid technique, a way to relieve the urges, if you will, then it would be the responsibility for the therapist to guide and regulate the exposure to such materials.  Its not like FA or any other site should be expected to provide it in such a case.

I do believe it can work as a therapy method, but I have not seen studies to support or refute.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> I do believe it can work as a therapy method, but I have not seen studies to support or refute.


Makes sense, though if the person is trying to get rid of their sexual thoughts to at least some degree, wouldn't art defeat the purpose?


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> Makes sense, though if the person is trying to get rid of their sexual thoughts to at least some degree, wouldn't art defeat the purpose?


 Depends.  I think that those with periodic or occasional urges, giving in to a substitute is a good way to correct it as it provides enough to get them over the urge so they can go back to normal life.  The the more frequent and intense the urge, the more traditional therapy to rid the thoughts is needed.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> Depends.  I think that those with periodic or occasional urges, giving in to a substitute is a good way to correct it as it provides enough to get them over the urge so they can go back to normal life.  The the more frequent and intense the urge, the more traditional therapy to rid the thoughts is needed.


 True enough, still seems like a sketchy method IMO, and would only work for some..the ones that are actually _trying_ to change.


----------



## Aleu (Aug 1, 2010)

Art is an alternative as well as chemical castration (Deproprovera I believe) or surgical.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> Art is an alternative as well as chemical castration (Deproprovera I believe) or surgical.


 They proved that castration was a good method of stopping pedophiles in Hard Candy...oh wait, Ellen Page was molested in that movie. Nevermind.


----------



## Aleu (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> They proved that castration was a good method of stopping pedophiles in Hard Candy...oh wait, Ellen Page was molested in that movie. Nevermind.


 Do what now?


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> Do what now?


 There was a movie back in 2005 I think called Hard Candy, about this little girl who was molested by this guy she met on the internet I believe. 
So basically, she then started castrating pedophiles. 

Here's basically the entire plot of the movie.

I've never actually seen it myself, but my mom was telling me about it.
Sounds kinda creepy though, couldn't imagine that feeling.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> There was a movie back in 2005 I think called Hard Candy, about this little girl who was molested by this guy she met on the internet I believe.
> So basically, she then started castrating pedophiles.
> 
> Here's basically the entire plot of the movie.
> ...


 
Damn, that's one epic kid.


----------



## Aleu (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> There was a movie back in 2005 I think called Hard Candy, about this little girl who was molested by this guy she met on the internet I believe.
> So basically, she then started castrating pedophiles.
> 
> Here's basically the entire plot of the movie.
> ...


 the fuck? Creepy/interesting movie also makes me rage at the misnomers.
A guy interested in younger teens wouldn't make him a pedophile. This is more along the lines of hebephilia. (Still illegal because minors and all)

Sorry, it just bugs me when all underage sex is automatically pedophilia. Too many times I've seen people raging that an 18 year old is a pedophile for having sex with a 16 year old. >.<



gatorguts said:


> Damn, that's one epic psycho kid.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> the fuck? Creepy/interesting movie also makes me rage at the misnomers.
> A guy interested in younger teens wouldn't make him a pedophile. This is more along the lines of hebephilia. (Still illegal because minors and all)
> 
> Sorry, it just bugs me when all underage sex is automatically pedophilia. Too many times I've seen people raging that an 18 year old is a pedophile for having sex with a 16 year old. >.<


 Eh, people are more accustomed and familiar with pedophilia though. Especially teens. 

Though there are two messages to this story sorta. Don't solicit sex from minors or you might lose your balls and don't meet creepy people on the internets.

Edit: Also fun fact, the chick in the movie is also Juno.


----------



## Aleu (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> Eh, people are more accustomed and familiar with pedophilia though. Especially teens.
> 
> Though there are two messages to this story sorta. Don't solicit sex from minors or you might lose your balls and don't meet creepy people on the internets.
> 
> Edit: Also fun fact, the chick in the movie is also Juno.


  Over-generalizations for the loss.

Wouldn't that be the same message? >.>

I need to watch more movies. That's the one with the chick who got pregnant and was gonna give her baby to this one couple, right?


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> Over-generalizations for the loss.
> 
> Wouldn't that be the same message? >.>
> 
> I need to watch more movies. That's the one with the chick who got pregnant and was gonna give her baby to this one couple, right?


 Yes and no, and yes it is.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 1, 2010)

An 18 year old screwing a 16 year old would be legal here. :/


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> An 18 year old screwing a 16 year old would be legal here. :/


 
It is in quite a few places yeah.


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> It is in quite a few places yeah.


 The youngest place in the US is Arkansas. It's 14. 

Though in general, sex with teens is kinda awkward.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

Willow said:


> The youngest place in the US is Arkansas. It's 14.
> 
> Though in general, sex with teens is kinda awkward.


Sex is awkward and teens are awkward.  teen sex is very awkward


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> Sex is awkward and teens are awkward.  teen sex is very awkward


 I think this post is awkward.

The word awkward is so awkward.
*Awkward.

Awkward.
*


----------



## Willow (Aug 1, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> Sex is awkward and teens are awkward.  teen sex is very awkward


 Pretty much :I


----------



## Aleu (Aug 1, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> An 18 year old screwing a 16 year old would be legal here. :/


 It isn't here. But hell, Florida is weird. Oral sex is banned but bestiality isn't


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> It isn't here. But hell, Florida is weird. Oral sex is banned but bestiality isn't


 Showering naked is illegal too.
and anal sex.
It's so funny.


----------



## Armaetus (Aug 1, 2010)

It's repulsive and should not exist.

/notateen


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 1, 2010)

Glaice said:


> It's repulsive and should not exist.
> 
> /notateen


 Here comes the comments with "YOUR OPINION DOESN'T = EVERYONE" bullshittery.

But I agree with you :I


----------



## Milo (Aug 1, 2010)

I think what's weird is that I've seen more people complain about cub, when I've actually seen more baby art... and when I say that, I mean full blown crap in your diaper's while sticking it up there porn.

although I think I've avoided this subject to the point to where I'm not fully sure if there's a distinction between cub and baby. like, is there a line between wearing diapers, to being considered cub? or is it the same thing?

it's wrong >:I


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 1, 2010)

Milo said:


> I think what's weird is that I've seen more people complain about cub, when I've actually seen more baby art... and when I say that, I mean full blown crap in your diaper's while sticking it up there porn.
> 
> although I think I've avoided this subject to the point to where I'm not fully sure if there's a distinction between cub and baby. like, is there a line between wearing diapers, to being considered cub? or is it the same thing?
> 
> it's wrong >:I


When I discuss cub art, I use it in reference to any art featuring obviously underaged characters.  I suspect that's how most use it as well when discussing this.  Yes its not accurate, but it helps simplify the dialog.

Diaper porn is gross.


----------



## Ames (Aug 2, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> Diaper porn is gross.


 
I think that's a bit of an understatement.


----------



## coward67 (Aug 2, 2010)

For those who have asked, I consider teen furry porn to be cub porn, I am referring to teen cub porn and as a rule, I keep the cub porn over the age of 10.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 2, 2010)

coward67 said:


> For those who have asked, I consider teen furry porn to be cub porn, I am referring to teen cub porn and as a rule, I keep the cub porn over the age of 10.


 
what is under ten for you then...?


----------



## Willow (Aug 2, 2010)

coward67 said:


> I keep the cub porn over the age of 10.


 .........what?


----------



## Ben (Aug 2, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> It isn't here. But hell, Florida is weird. Oral sex is banned but bestiality isn't


 
Actually, it is. Anyone up to the age of 23 in Florida can legally have sex with a 16 year old.

I dunno, it just sounded wrong to me.


----------



## Anon1 (Aug 2, 2010)

coward67 said:


> I keep the cub porn over the age of 10.


 I am now judging you harshly for this post


----------



## Machine (Aug 2, 2010)

coward67 said:


> For those who have asked, I consider teen furry porn to be cub porn, I am referring to teen cub porn and as a rule, I keep the cub porn over the age of 10.


We'd all appreciate if you'd get the fuck out now.

I thought this thread was locked.


----------



## Van Ishikawa (Aug 2, 2010)

coward67 said:


> For those who have asked, I consider teen furry porn to be cub porn, I am referring to teen cub porn and as a rule, I keep the cub porn over the age of 10.


What a noble gesture.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 2, 2010)

coward67 said:


> For those who have asked, I consider teen furry porn to be cub porn, I am referring to teen cub porn and as a rule, I keep the cub porn over the age of 10.


 
OH I GET IT NOW. yea man, me too.


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 2, 2010)

AleutheWolf said:


> It isn't here. But hell, Florida is weird. Oral sex is banned but bestiality isn't


 dont worry...next year....next year we can try again...unless Gay marriage is back up and then fuck that we lost again as gay marriage is far more important than stopping folks from *training* their pets to be fuck toys.


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 2, 2010)

coward67 said:


> I keep the cub porn _over the age of 10_.


 What.
The.
Fuck?

You're a dumbass and disgusting.


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 2, 2010)

coward67 said:


> For those who have asked, I consider teen furry porn to be cub porn, I am referring to teen cub porn and as a rule, I keep the cub porn over the age of 10.


 ....
wait what?


----------



## Usarise (Aug 2, 2010)

Cub is gross.  Why would anyone fap to children? D:


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 2, 2010)

Usarise said:


> Cub is gross.  Why would anyone fap to children? D:


 Pedophilessss?
BUT NOOOO.

You're not a pedophile if you fap to cartoon children! They're just on paper!
:I


----------



## Usarise (Aug 2, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> Pedophilessss?
> BUT NOOOO.
> 
> You're not a pedophile if you fap to cartoon children! They're just on paper!
> :I


Your still a creeper though.... 

Cartoon children is close to real children!


----------



## sorryinSPACE (Aug 2, 2010)

Usarise said:


> Your still a creeper though....
> 
> Cartoon children is close to real children!


 
I know this, but there are people on this thread stating because the kid isn't real/is on paper, they're not a pedophile or a major creeper.
It's still representing a child.


----------



## Usarise (Aug 2, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> I know this, but there are people on this thread stating because the kid isn't real/is on paper, they're not a pedophile or a major creeper.
> It's still representing a child.


 
Personally I don't really care though is the funny thing... It just another reason for me to call others freaks...

But yeah it does still represent a child, so I would still say they are a pedophile.


----------



## BasementRaptor42 (Aug 2, 2010)

This thread is bad and you should feel bad, OP.


----------



## paintballadict9 (Aug 3, 2010)

its a freakin picture...doesnt interest me but i dont hate it.


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 3, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> You're not a pedophile if you fap to cartoon children! They're just on paper!
> :I


 
technically, you're right. it IS pedophilia. but that's the loaded question. you can't admit to it because "pedophilia" immediately tells people "kiddle diddler".
so, yes. if we want to pick apart the terms, cub porn makes you a pedophile. do you have to act on it? no. it makes you one, but it's not an A = B = C thing.


----------



## Ratte (Aug 3, 2010)

Van Ishikawa said:


> \This happened, people thought they were actually wizards.  Along with the story of the kids who thought they were werewolves, and covens of witches, and people claiming they're vampires, ect.  People are stupid and impressionable, and while we enjoy mocking, this can be incredibly dangerous.


 
Then they're a fucking waste in their gene pool.


----------



## CrazyLee (Aug 3, 2010)

Willow said:


> How so? Who would you say we ask. A kid doesn't know what sex or porn is; so how would they be able to give a proper answer?



What I meant was that this guy was asking about how teens felt about porn of furs their age. The problem is most cub porn depicts minors under the age of 12 or so. He said he only likes cub porn over 10, yet I've never seen any cub porn of teens before.



RandyDarkshade said:


> You need to lurk more in anime. I have seen plenty of porn pictures in anime depicting girls a lot younger than 14. I gave up looking at hentai because I was sick and tired of fucking seeing it.


You're thinking of lolicon. I was talking about non-lolicon hentai.


Van Ishikawa said:


> Yep, they do.  it's actually quite amusing for things like imported H-games from Japan, where the obviously underaged protagonist is said to have just had his 18th birthday, then hooks up with his younger sister that same day.


 That's the point. A majority of legal, non-lolicon hentai is actually of teenagers, and in the US, the ages are converted to 18 to make it legal. I could sit here and give examples of legal porn from legal hentai sites and be like "she's 16 in Japan", "she's 14 in japan", ect. And yet no one runs around screaming pedophilia about those pictures.
Then you have obvious lolicon which is under 14 or so, which is legal in japan, and is obviously pedophilic in nature. And yet there still isn't controversy in the anime community about lolicon.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 3, 2010)

CrazyLee said:


> What I meant was that this guy was asking about how teens felt about porn of furs their age. The problem is most cub porn depicts minors under the age of 12 or so. He said he only likes cub porn over 10, yet I've never seen any cub porn of teens before.


 
I have. I can even name a user and his character.


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 3, 2010)

CrazyLee said:


> Then you have obvious lolicon which is under 14 or so, which is legal in japan, and is obviously pedophilic in nature. And yet there still isn't controversy in the anime community about lolicon.


 may I ask "where the fuck you hanging around in the anime community, as just like us furs, they are often fighting if its wrong or alright, the problem is it never leaves outside their community like our bitching about cub porn never leave ours.


----------



## Ben (Aug 3, 2010)

gatorguts said:


> I know this, but there are people on this thread stating because the kid isn't real/is on paper, they're not a pedophile or a major creeper.
> It's still representing a child.


 
I don't think anyone's claiming that because it's not a real child that they're not pedophiles-- it's just a healthier alternative to looking at CP, or going out and luring kids into the Mystery Van.

At the end of the day though, cub porn is still allowed on the site because it's up to the viewer to decide what the context of the image is, unless it's very clearly outlined in a comic or something. Regardless though, it's the freedom to interpret a picture's meaning that separates it from real kiddie porn. In real CP? A child is being abused-- there's no question about it. But with all art, the underlying nature of the picture is up to the viewer's interpretation. It's not always as ambiguous with some images, but as long as it's possible, I fully understand why "cub porn" is allowed on this site.


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 3, 2010)

Ben said:


> I don't think anyone's claiming that because it's not a real child that they're not pedophiles-- it's just a healthier alternative to looking at CP, or going out and luring kids into the Mystery Van.
> 
> At the end of the day though, cub porn is still allowed on the site because it's up to the viewer to decide what the context of the image is, unless it's very clearly outlined in a comic or something. Regardless though, it's the freedom to interpret a picture's meaning that separates it from real kiddie porn. In real CP? A child is being abused-- there's no question about it. But with all art, the underlying nature of the picture is up to the viewer's interpretation. It's not always as ambiguous with some images, but as long as it's possible, I fully understand why "cub porn" is allowed on this site.


Tell me, do you know of the great banning of Cub Porn in FA's Past?


----------



## Ben (Aug 3, 2010)

Crysix Fousen said:


> Tell me, do you know of the great banning of Cub Porn in FA's Past?


 
Cub porn has never been banned in the history of FA. There was a time when it was nearly banned, but that was about four years ago.


----------



## Tomias_Redford (Aug 3, 2010)

I'm about to say one of the very few intelligent things I say on this board.

Cub Porn = bad

Cub Porn fans = Paedophiles

Paedophiles = not worthy of life

End of discussion...


----------



## Ben (Aug 3, 2010)

Tomias_Redford said:


> I'm about to say one of the very few intelligent things I say on this board.


 
I think you're giving yourself a little too much credit there.


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 3, 2010)

Tomias_Redford said:


> I'm about to say one of the very few intelligent things I say on this board.
> 
> Cub Porn = bad
> 
> ...


 ....
I'm sorry thats...not very intelligent to resay what has been said in this thread over and over again

as for me I solved the cub porn thing by adblocking it on FA of known artist that draws it alot


----------



## Zontar (Aug 3, 2010)

If you actually fap to cub porn, you need a tire iron to the side of the fucking head.


----------



## Ben (Aug 3, 2010)

Zontar said:


> If you actually fap to cub porn, you need a tire iron to the side of the fucking head.


 
Thank you for that touching and valuable contribution.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 3, 2010)

Ben said:


> Thank you for that touching and valuable contribution.



Truth hurts, well, hurts those that fap to it when Zontar takes a tire iron to their head. XD


----------



## foxmusk (Aug 3, 2010)

Tomias_Redford said:


> I'm about to say one of the very few intelligent things I say on this board.
> 
> Cub Porn = bad
> 
> ...



it's pedophiles _FOR FUCK'S SAKE_. paedophiles is archaic AND SPELLCHECK AGREES. you also say foeces? didn't think so. STOP IT. at least use the G.D. ae symbol if you just feel it ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY. here, i'll copypaste it for you. Ã¦

THAT MATTER ASIDE...your reasoning on why they're not worthy of life? not the pedophiles who actually commit the act, but someone who is sexually attracted to children and HATES THEMSELVES FOR IT. tell me, why do THEY not deserve life?

OR for that matter, what makes any pedophile not deserving of life? what makes them so much worse than the murderers that society praises?



Zontar said:


> If you actually fap to cub porn, you need a tire iron to the side of the fucking head.


 
nah, we should lynch 'em like they did back when! that's how it should be for anyone who's not heterosexual and white!


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 3, 2010)

HarleyRoadkill said:


> OR for that matter, what makes any pedophile not deserving of life? what makes them so much worse than the murderers that society praises



Since when does society "praise" murderers? And pedophiles deserve to live as much as anyone. what they don't deserve is to be around children, even their own.


----------



## Royal Flush (Aug 3, 2010)

No one cares about your werid ass cub fetish, COWARD


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 3, 2010)

Royal Flush said:


> No one cares about your werid ass cub fetish, COWARD



You cared enough about it to post that comment. :/


----------



## Royal Flush (Aug 3, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> You cared enough about it to post that comment. :/


 
True...


----------



## Willow (Aug 3, 2010)

CrazyLee said:


> What I meant was that this guy was asking about how teens felt about porn of furs their age. The problem is most cub porn depicts minors under the age of 12 or so. He said he only likes cub porn over 10, yet I've never seen any cub porn of teens before.


 Which doesn't really make sense. Cub is children, I don't even think there is a real name for teen furry porn. Which there, I might a little more lenient with. Seeing as how the characters are of a sexual age, _usually_. 



CrazyLee said:


> You're thinking of lolicon. I was talking about non-lolicon hentai.
> 
> That's the point. A majority of legal, non-lolicon hentai is actually of teenagers, and in the US, the ages are converted to 18 to make it legal. I could sit here and give examples of legal porn from legal hentai sites and be like "she's 16 in Japan", "she's 14 in japan", ect. And yet no one runs around screaming pedophilia about those pictures.
> Then you have obvious lolicon which is under 14 or so, which is legal in japan, and is obviously pedophilic in nature. And yet there still isn't controversy in the anime community about lolicon.


Shotacon is usually 12 year old boys, lolicon is usually 14 year old girls and under. Somewhere around there. 
In Japan those ages are considered the age before pubescence. 

Though while we view the actions portrayed illegal, or wrong, or whatever. Kids having sex with other kids at least, fact is, age of consent there is 14. 
I don't exactly know how that would work for kidXadult, maybe the same, though just more awkward.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 3, 2010)

Willow said:


> Which doesn't really make sense. Cub is children, I don't even think there is a real name for teen furry porn. Which there, I might a little more lenient with. Seeing as how the characters are of a sexual age, _usually_.
> 
> 
> Shotacon is usually 12 year old boys, lolicon is usually 14 year old girls and under. Somewhere around there.
> ...



I believe the legal age is 12 in Amsterdam.


----------



## Willow (Aug 3, 2010)

RandyDarkshade said:


> I believe the legal age is 12 in Amsterdam.


 The site I've been using to look up consent doesn't have Amsterdam, though I wouldn't be surprised if it were.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 3, 2010)

Willow said:


> The site I've been using to look up consent doesn't have Amsterdam, though I wouldn't be surprised if it were.



If the research I did is true, then it is actually 16.

If that is true then I was told some bullshit years ago, or it changed.


----------



## Verin Asper (Aug 3, 2010)

deep down I want to say
Maybe its time to lock this tread, we have reach full circle several times. This topic is a dead horse as its constantly brought up and nothing is gained or lost.

The OP mostly worded this topic wrong as its not implying Teen Furs in sexual situations but a Teenager point of view of Cub porn.

We have heard even from some teenagers here on the forum that they are against it, some state its an better outlet than downloading an actual video of an actual child being used in such a way, and then we got some adults coming stating "even though I'm against it, its not illegal in the US".

Many users brought up "Its a drawing, its not hurting anyone" to which is damn true, its just the fact that cub is the furry fandoms representation of a child is what irking us as we are against real Child Porn.

I'm gonna lie down...being sick is making me feel smart...and I hate that


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Aug 3, 2010)

Crysix Fousen said:


> deep down I want to say
> Maybe its time to lock this tread, we have reach full circle several times. This topic is a dead horse as its constantly brought up and nothing is gained or lost.
> 
> The OP mostly worded this topic wrong as its not implying Teen Furs in sexual situations but a Teenager point of view of Cub porn.
> ...



I agree. I think Kelliegator's thread should be aswell. Both threads have discussed the same thing, and both threads have done full circles. I don't think much more can be discussed without bringing in points that have already been debated into the ground.


----------

