On Aug 3, 2007 6:45 pm, Hotspur said:
[quote]

I say go one step further and make it The Big Five:  pedophilia, necrophilia, incest, bestiality and scat. 

[/quote]

Your points are well taken. I agree with all of those except for incest. I've seen some art of Sesshoumaru and Inuyasha (whom are brothers) and I think that's pretty hot. I don't think it's really wrong because they are fantasy characters and can't really be blood relatives. But I think necrophillia, bestiality, and scat can't really be done in 'good taste'. (by scat you mean involving fecal matter right?). Also, bestiality does not involve yiffy/furry art does it? These are all things it would be best if we consider now and figure out the rules on.

Hotspur

It seems ,by what you say, that if you draw something that means you do it in real life. Yes, i draw alil underage here and there but I'm not a pedo or a child molester.

As far as "pedophilia, necrophilia, incest, bestiality and scat" go I think you're getting far out of line and off the subject.

Bestiality is the choice of a person to have relates with an animal. I really don't care with you do in your free. Not hurting you or the animal ,go right ahead.

Pedoing is wrong ,but don't try to slap the pedo sticker on artists that draw it. Unless you have real proof they are pedos you have no right to say that, as far as i'm concered.

Necrophilia...No one was even talking about that.

Scat...You'd be surprised at how few there is of that unless you LOOKING FOR IT!

What I see you doing right now is accusing me of being a pedophilie JUST because I do alil souta and loli every now and then ,and I don't like that one bit, sir or ma'am. I would never do such a thing to a child.

...Oh almost forgot incest. Incest is viewed as alil gross to some ,but overall there's nothing wrong with it. how much as wrong with it isn't based on the law ,as much as it is the people themselves that have to deal with things like that.

Scat, Besti, and incest are personal choices. You don't have any sort of right to tell people otherwise.

Necro is ...unhealthy, but i see alot of guys with usernames like "DeadGirlsDontSayNo" running around as I can be too disgusted all the time or I would never get on the internetz. I do know for heath reasons it is illegal.

And what does " not be lulled into a feeling of intimidation by those who want to use this forum as a seeding ground for their agendas." mean?

Surely you're not impiling(?) that anyone turing to scare Bogus into just up ,and doing it. Also that we're just gonna turn PD into pedo-land ,if she does beside to change it.

No one has any will to scare anyone or turn the dsite compeltely one sided.

On Aug 3, 2007 6:45 pm, Hotspur said:
[quote]

Yes, continue the bans on underage sexuality, with the usual caveats about a bare-bottomed toddler in its mothers arms.  I say go one step further and make it The Big Five:  pedophilia, necrophilia, incest, bestiality and scat. 

[/quote]

I agree with Bogusred. It REALLY comes down to taste. if anyone posts anything like that that isn't tastefull- report it and let an admin desde if it should stay. They'll figure out pretty quickly that thier art isn't welcome here :yes:

On Aug 3, 2007 6:45 pm, Hotspur said:

  I say go one step further and make it The Big Five:  pedophilia, necrophilia, incest, bestiality and scat. 

I echo a few other posts in agreeing that even in those things, there's the consideration of being subject to personal taste or preference.
While I don't agree with true pedophilia or necrophilia (agreed, just unhealthy and in my opinion kind of creepy and gross), over-age incest isn't a law-breaking situation in many, many places... In fact, older days first cousins would quite often wed to preserve family lines... Yet now, many call that incest because we simply don't need to do that.  But is it, really?  My great grandparents were first cousins... but I don't consider myself a byproduct of incest. 

Beastialty is all about the animal, in my opinion.  Unfortunately, this act got some bad acclaim more recently in the news (in my more local news, that is, in the eastern United States) when some people were raping farm animals and then needlessly slaughtering them (as if they could have gone to report their trauma...).  This, in my opinion, is a dark and unusual side of beastiality.  My opinion is, if the animal's not being hurt and is enjoying it, what you do in your own time is up to you.  And then there is the question, yes, does anthro sex count as beastiality?  I know many who consider it does, and that's their opinion. 

Scat... *shudder.*  Basically, I'm a "whatever turns you on" kind of person, so I wouldn't insult anyone who finds this sexy, it's just icky to me personally. =)

Ok, that's my 5c worth! ^-^  I like this forum...

On Aug 3, 2007 7:19 pm, BogusRed said:

Your points are well taken. I agree with all of those except for incest. I've seen some art of Sesshoumaru and Inuyasha (whom are brothers) and I think that's pretty hot. I don't think it's really wrong because they are fantasy characters and can't really be blood relatives. But I think necrophillia, bestiality, and scat can't really be done in 'good taste'. (by scat you mean involving fecal matter right?). Also, bestiality does not involve yiffy/furry art does it? These are all things it would be best if we consider now and figure out the rules on.

There's an old saying in law enforcement that if you want people to drive 60, you set the speed limit at 55.  I've found that a similar standard with art is a good thing to have.  It's artistic nature to push the envelope, to break new ground, to test the barriers, to move closer to the edge to see what's on the other side.

I'm not going to respond to each person who responded to me--especially the incoherent one--but suffice to say that the "they're all fantasy characters" argument has been advanced before. One has to remember that fantasy is not just a genre but also a noun.  It's a projection of a person's desire for an ideal, and art is a physical manifestation of the artist's metaphysical value judgments--we display what we want to draw attention toward.  That's not to say that an artist who does shota/loli is a necessarily a pedophile, but that the artist believes representation of a child in erotica is appropriate. The question is:  do you want a population that believes the sexualization of children is appropriate fare?  Because that only goes downhill, gathering speed.  I say continue to err on the side of caution.

Bestiality is human/animal, not to be confused with human/anthro or anthro/anthro.

Incest... you're on your own with that one. 

Scat is a term I use both for urine and feces, tho the literal definition is feces only.  I've seen it done effectively, if not tastefully, to communicate bleak conditions of prisoners and victims of cruelty.  As a sexual device... blecch!

In the end, you're the boss, you make the decisions and bear the consequences of those decisions.  What I offer is my own experience from 33 years as an artist, and if you take nothing else away from my comments, let it be this:  no matter what your intent, no matter what the facts, no matter how you explain yourself, sometimes you just attract the wrong kind of people and once that door is opened it's very hard to get it closed again.

On Aug 4, 2007 4:44 am, Hotspur said:

I'm not going to respond to each person who responded to me--especially the incoherent one--

I think it'd be best to leave such labels out of this thread... don't you?  I could read and mostly understand every post on this forum thread, and if someone is attempting to make a valid point (and even if not, really) then it's best not to throw unkind adjectives at them.  It's just not polite... agreed?

Ok, as far as good tase goes ,i agree. Scat, and such ok... Incest I'm still gonna fight for. Necro...not so much.

BACK ON SUBJECT!

I seriously think Hotspur is saying that ,because something in drawn then that means we do it ,or somehow are more likely to do it in real life.

That whole "no matter what your intent, no matter what the facts, no matter how you explain yourself, sometimes you just attract the wrong kind of people and once that door is opened it's very hard to get it closed again." is really giving me an "attacked" feeling.

~

And seeing as how getting off subject is so popular:

I must say i really can't believe I'm the only one at "nya" about this ,and haveing something to say, seeing as how i KNOW I'm not the only one with the debatable underage issue. Where did all the people go on this? With all these people here I'm the only one willing to speak out about this?

A part of me wants to give up seeing as how in the stand off i'm CLEARLY out numbered, and now I feel slightly attacked by Hotspur. A part of me just can't though. A side of me at that's the EXTERME expressionist(?) ,and artistic side just won't let it be.

This is like saying " Omg! You watch violate stuff on tv ,and play Mortal Combat (old school) so you must be a violate f--ed in the head person! We have to ban it! " when it's just a VIDEO GAME.

There's a difference between knowing right from wrong ,and just trying to froce yourself on people.

The probelm is people are letting TV ,and other things rasie the young ,instead of doing what they can to raise them as they're own.

Things like this spread and become bad ,BECAUSE few understand the differecne between fantasy and reality.

They see people walking around on TV calling women all sorts of things, and then they do it in real life ,because no one's slapping them upside the head and telling them it's wrong.

With things like some 30 year old having sex with a 8 year old YOU KNOW THAT'S WRONG. It doesn't sit right with you with lil difference as to how you brought up, unless that's around you ALOT.

On the subject of child/child:

I know this next line for a fact: Lil kids touch themselve all the time. When they get not some must as alil older they wanna see what it's like to touch each other. I mean like first kiss, play doctor, play house, and so on.

Now you may be thinking: "Eww! That's gross!" ,but it's true. You can even ask a doctor ,if you don't believe me, but would really have to be if you never did it yourself. Even I played house...once.

I take it in a sence people are thinking "It's realistic fantasy. A child can be molested ,and such." I'm gonna tell ya' i've read realistic fantasy books...IT'S STILL NOT REAL! Yes, child molested ,blah blah ,blah ,but...

Ok, you draw a werewolf, does that mean you ARE a werewolf? NO!

Let's say for ..."realistic" reasons (seeing as how everyone seems to want to go there) , if someone was a child molester wouldn't they be too busy molesting children to bother drawing it ,and posting it on an art site?

Methinks this is getting a little too heated at the moment - let's everyone take a deep breath.

I think what Hotspur is saying is not meant to be directed at any artists on the site currently.  I think (this is what I understand) that he is trying to say that with Shota and Loli in place, people outside our community may become attracted to the fact that we allow these types of art, and come to the site for less than admirable reasons.

Please do not reduce yourselves to insulting each other.  We are a community, not an army.  debates are fine - name-calling is not.  Let's keep that in mind, ok?

On that note - I do see how Hotspur's messages could have been read to be taken the wrong way, but please sit back and reconsider:  I don't think he means any direct offense to those people here.  The point he seems to be making is that the artwork itself - while not necessarily drawn by those with strange fetishes or ill-thoughts - can attract the wrong kind of people, like pedophiles.  His words on this matter sound very similar to those exhibited by my government on the subject of why we have these laws in place...  That's why it is illegal to view and/or draw children in sexy poses or sexual situations.  They believe that it condones child abuse.

I am not saying any one side is right or wrong, but I -am- trying to explain the arguments I'm seeing in a more comprehensive light.  I hope I have succeeded.

On Aug 4, 2007 8:27 am, Nekoyoujo said:
[quote]

This is like saying " Omg! You watch violate stuff on tv ,and play Mortal Combat (old school) so you must be a violate f--ed in the head person! We have to ban it! " when it's just a VIDEO GAME.

The probelm is people are letting TV ,and other things rasie the young ,instead of doing what they can to raise them as they're own.

I know this next line for a fact: Lil kids touch themselve all the time. When they get not some must as alil older they wanna see what it's like to touch each other. I mean like first kiss, play doctor, play house, and so on.

Let's say for ..."realistic" reasons (seeing as how everyone seems to want to go there) , if someone was a child molester wouldn't they be too busy molesting children to bother drawing it ,and posting it on an art site?

[/quote]

I have a few things in reply... First of all, I believe this is all "on subject" since it's in the same theme as the original post, and it's an intelligent discussion.  It's really not necessary to keep yelling at everyone to get back on subject just because it's your subject that you want to get "back to."  Forums tend to drift slightly from the very very specific starting subject, and that's still "on subject."

Second, are you forgetting violent video games are indeed linked to violent behavior?  I'm not saying anyone who plays Halo is going to go on a killing spree, but as far as children, even if they're told it's not real sometimes yes, they do actually go out and kill a kid just to act like the video game.  That is not "on subject," sure, but it's a fact.

Oh yes, children touch themselves and each other.  I've seen countless children with their hands down their pants, or other children's pants, it's a fact of life as they grow older and start to learn about body parts they want to explore that and understand that.  They can also feel physical pleasure from those parts of their body from infancy (mind you this is NOT "sexual" pleasure, it's different), so it's naturally for even a toddler to play with themselves because it feels nice.  It's not true "masturbation" and it's not a sexual act, but it's just something they ARE bound to do, and any doctor who has researched this will tell you the same. 

And on the subject of child molesters... there are MANY types of pedophiles.  Not all who are classified as pedophile go out and physically touch children.  Some get their jollies from watching kids on a playground.  Some just like to bump up against a child in a pool.  Some like to watch them undress.  Some want to touch and be touched, yes, and even more.  Some just like watching kiddie porn.  Some would love to see some good shota art.  Do you see where I'm going with this?   No, I'm not saying that anyone who looks at shota art or even draws it is a pedophile or a child molester, but you cannot just say that a pedophile won't look at shota or draw it because they only molest children.  There is far more to it. 

Some of those things were off-topic, but that is because you brought them up and I felt the need to respond and clarify.  Raising kids is again, a totally different topic.  You cannot yell at us for being off topic and bring up things completely unrelated to the subject at hand.  Sexually situated art on this site appears in the Red Curtain, a place meant for adult content and adult viewing.  The subject of children viewing inappropriate material isn't the concern here, to my understanding.

Fantasy vs. reality is a touchy subject, and the fact is that it is simply impossible for everyone to agree 100% on what this blurry line is and where it should be.  The best thing a website community can do is decide and agree on a middle ground that satisfies most or all in a compromise of interests, tastes, and values.  If it is good for the many, and a select few cannot handle it, well... there are other website communities, and I think that's completely fair.  (This was meant in-general, not for anyone on this thread or this website, just the fact that sometimes people leave for conflict of interest.  Please don't take it to be directed at anyone.)

I think what is being done here is trying to feel out where that yet-undefined line might be, and grab it and color over it with a big-ass sharpie so that everyone can see it.  Does that make sense?

So it seems to me from all this that submitting art of children in sexual acts is not allowed, but you can still submit child nudity?