I don't understand, does this have some story that I don't know?

a_boy_xp said:
I don't understand, does this have some story that I don't know?

The general version is people look at the kinds of drawing on sites like these and conflate them with real people being victimized or exploited. I forget when, but there was once a call for human rights to be extended to fictional characters. It's that out of control.

undonezippy said:
I feel like this image is just here to cause drama and discourse. I don't like it.

I think this post calls people out who do that actually. But that's just what I think

undonezippy said:
I feel like this image is just here to cause drama and discourse. I don't like it.

The irony is that until you made your comment, this comment section was 100% helpful and no arguments.

undonezippy said:
I feel like this image is just here to cause drama and discourse. I don't like it.

Sounds like projection to me. We got one, folks! :D

undonezippy said:
Having a character hold a sign that strawmans one end of a discourse topic and posting it to a furry art site doesn't seem like a move against discourse.

Is it strawmanning if it actually happens, though? Do you remember a game called Rape Day, by chance? It was a visual novel told from the perspective of a psychopath during a zombie apocalypse, I think it was, whose motivation was to rape women. It was a topic of discussion in a group I was in and one guy said the premise was disgusting and the developers deserved to be raped to see who they like it. I and another woman in the group questioned him but never found out why he'd say something so unhinged. He did ask us, though, why there has to be rape. Both our responses amounted to, "because the script says so." I just assume he was hype fixated on the crime and ignoring the fact the POV character is a monster doing monstrous things.

If i remember correctly this image was made as answer to some other image that said the opposite.

The worst part about all of this is that, the people who go out of their way to try and "protect" fictional characters, going so far as to throw death threats at the people who consume the content said fictional characters are put into, cant even levy a fraction of that energy into protecting people in the real world. People are more than willing to throw thousands upon thousands of their regional currency at the government to punish or otherwise inhibit the creation of content they find morally repulsive, 90% of which is loli/cub/young character related, but wont even throw fractions of that at funds that are aimed at saving people in real life situations.

Regardless of your moral standpoint, regardless of the content contained within a fictional piece of art, regardless of how absolutely reprehensible the content may or may not be, it is at the end of the day, pure fiction. If you're going to stand on your moral highground and condemn the content on the basis of it being immoral, you HAVE to go the full 9 yards and hold EVERYTHING to a moral standpoint. Murder is just as reprehensible as rape is just as reprehensible as CP. Yet unless you hold every piece of fictional content that exists outside of the bounds of our physical reality and thus cannot harm a single living soul to the same moral standpoint, you are by definition upholding a double standard because you personally enjoy at least one of those pieces of content. The Saw movies are horrendously vile, filled with actions and content that by all means would warrant the immediate execution of anyone that mimed Jigsaw and his crimes, and yet they are enjoyed by millions of people and while criticized by some for their content, are more than allowed to exist in today's media. Your personal moralities have no sway over the content of fiction, for they are fictional and not real. You are more than welcome and indeed absolutely encouraged to chose to ignore the content if you find it repulsive, but acting like you HAVE to stop it before it harms someone is entirely pointless, for again, moralities exist only within the realm of non-fiction and our own physical existence.

Please and thanks.

Thank you.
It can be honestly tiring for me to deal with.

ezequiell said:
If i remember correctly this image was made as answer to some other image that said the opposite.

I drew this pic. I posted another Kanna pic on Twitter which got a lot of comments saying she's a child and it's pedophilia so I got upset and drew this. Kinda wish I didn't. Protect real children instead of fictional ones though.

borvar said:
I drew this pic. I posted another Kanna pic on Twitter which got a lot of comments saying she's a child and it's pedophilia so I got upset and drew this. Kinda wish I didn't. Protect real children instead of fictional ones though.

I think its fine. While protecting real kids is always the most important goal, making people realise that fictional things isn't worth argueing over is always a goal I support, even though people will never accept that.

I'm reminded of a interesting hypothesis someone made. When one uploads loli images with the intent of sharing it with others who like similar images, they're projecting. So if someone is going out of their way to find stuff like this and make accusations about the uploader, and has no actual evidence to support their claims, that only leaves projection as a reasonable conclusion

foxvase said:
The general version is people look at the kinds of drawing on sites like these and conflate them with real people being victimized or exploited. I forget when, but there was once a call for human rights to be extended to fictional characters. It's that out of control.

I feel like the real problematic people are those ones, who really believe drawings are real...

With the brand new rule change in mind, now is a great time to revisit pieces like this.

Well, well, well, we find ourselves here once again...

Gotta love "changes in the political and legal environment" forcing FICTIONAL CHARACTERS off of a site that is to archive and distribute the best / strangest / most excellent furry-related artwork, regardless of content, for all those who wish to view it.

New law is basically saying that fictional characters are real now...

Look upon your shame, e621 staff.

Rip all the kanna art

Looks like I need to change my profile picture to this.

the_mechaneer said:
Looks like I need to change my profile picture to this.

unironically same, that, or the "let people enjoy things" one, long is but fiction and no one is actually harmed, why would/should people care?

Looks like e6 is about to become even worse... The enshitification of this site is such a continual problem. Archive sites like this are the last bastion of freedom in the nsfw art sphere. The fact they're starting to back down is not a good sign. I understand some of this is for legal reasons, but even those should be able to be combated, at least somewhat, since e6 is hosted in the USA. It's unconstitutional to peer-pressure change over something that harms no one. Some of this also seems performative though. Ultimately very pointless.

Another site being fucked by the normies opinions, I love how people care more about fictional characters than they do real children.

manyura said:
New law is basically saying that fictional characters are real now...

There is no new law. This is still protected speech in America where e621 is hosted. It's purely to protect them from their "business partners" (ie investors probably)

Why this is quite topical now

drghybrid said:
There is no new law. This is still protected speech in America where e621 is hosted. It's purely to protect them from their "business partners" (ie investors probably)

Why don't the mods purge this picture
It's a young humanoid afterall

borvar said:
I drew this pic. I posted another Kanna pic on Twitter which got a lot of comments saying she's a child and it's pedophilia so I got upset and drew this. Kinda wish I didn't. Protect real children instead of fictional ones though.

Your first mistake was engaging with Twitter people lol

Bet they're gonna remove even more then just this. Dont be shocked in the slightest if cub will get put on the chopping block without warning.

This has become sadly relevant for e6

manyura said:
Why don't the mods purge this picture
It's a young humanoid afterall

AFAIK it's only the ones depicting them involving in NSFW scenes or just being plain naked. Fully clothed young humanoids seem to be fine

the_mechaneer said:
Looks like I need to change my profile picture to this.

To be honest, I think this should be the official logo of those who protest current actions by mods and antis, as well as the double-standards of those who think it's only okay when it's fictional animals.

lewddoggy2500 said:
Bet they're gonna remove even more then just this. Dont be shocked in the slightest if cub will get put on the chopping block without warning.

Yep, I predict it'll be cub next, then they'll target necro, then bestiality, and then rape, then feral as a whole, until it spirals so far out of control and even LGBT related stuff starts getting purged because the site will get blocked otherwise...

It'll be like the library of alexandria, with the fire spreading from book to book :1

sex_goblin_69 said:
Yep, I predict it'll be cub next, then they'll target necro, then bestiality, and then rape, then feral as a whole, until it spirals so far out of control and even LGBT related stuff starts getting purged because the site will get blocked otherwise...

It'll be like the library of alexandria, with the fire spreading from book to book :1

sex_goblin_69 said:
Yep, I predict it'll be cub next, then they'll target necro, then bestiality, and then rape, then feral as a whole, until it spirals so far out of control and even LGBT related stuff starts getting purged because the site will get blocked otherwise...

It'll be like the library of alexandria, with the fire spreading from book to book :1

And now they've locked the original thread because of how badly it went. Its questionable as to how far things will go since this looks to be less about morals, and more out of fear from advertisers essentially pulling support. Which honestly? I'm still confused since I hadn't heard about any new laws or whatnot coming into play that has people in a panic.

This picture sure is an evergreen, huh? It's just... never gonna stop being relevant.

Well well well.. another site down the drain

There have been plenty of annoying changes and unfair bannings of my favorite artists from here before but this new rule in particular is especially dumb and really makes me want to use other sites instead of e621

sex_goblin_69 said:
AFAIK it's only the ones depicting them involving in NSFW scenes or just being plain naked. Fully clothed young humanoids seem to be fine

There's still the issue of the tag existing I mean. The ban is for porn of the characters that specifically human or humanoid but like. You'd think they'd want to just delete the tag/pictures entirely to be thorough about this new policy. Anyway this thread may get locked eventually because people keep talking about it under a "sfw" picture and that may fall under inappropriate comments.

It makes me think about something:

This site hosts animal and animal-like character arts in a sexual (if not pornographic) way yet they're not seen as real since "they're only drawings" (or polygonal models for 3D) even if some of them look very realistic yet when a character that can clearly look stylised enough (I mean this one looks anime which is quite far from realism in term of design and proportions like with cartoons) to be distinctive from reality cannot get that same pass.

I mean of course, most furries that are on this site are absolutely against harming and abusing real animals in the same way people (anime fans or not) are against harming real children.

It makes me wonder where's the line between what is considered okay or not in term of drawing.

PS: Anyway I prefer Quetzalcoatl in that show.

manyura said:
There's still the issue of the tag existing I mean. The ban is for porn of the characters that specifically human or humanoid but like. You'd think they'd want to just delete the tag/pictures entirely to be thorough about this new policy. Anyway this thread may get locked eventually because people keep talking about it under a "sfw" picture and that may fall under inappropriate comments.

I mean that's basically inevitable, as it's inherently related to the discussion at hand.