fchan

No offense, but you're asking for an explation to human thought.  There is no single explanation, and for stuff like that you'd have to ask a shrink.  :D

so finally a pic made you go 'ewwwwwwww' and even if you're right you cant complain because it's ART!

1> "Whine...cry....complain...yaddayadda...."

For the record:  In my opinion, it's wrong.  But, framed as it is, it is artwork.  Nothing more.  Besides....the troll won anyway by you posting about it here.  All you did was stir the shitpot even more by posting about it.   You're given fair warning about /ah/ before you even go in.  Expect to see the /b/tards (or would that be /ah/tards?) posting inflamitory items and skip over what you don't want to see.  Simple, short and to the point.  Nadia's gone.  We have no more ban-happy or delete-happy admin.  Get used to it.  I'm sure that Xeno would have done something about it had it been illegal in any way, shape or form.

I don't like rape and guro. Rape and guro make me sick, but I don't go whining about drawings, and the people that like them don't go around raping and killing people because of drawings.

The stuff is highly illegal in Canada (Regina v. Sharp set precedent) and ratio wise, we have no more and no less sexual assaults on children than far more art-liberal countries.

>>11 There are -no- proven studies anywhere that if someone draws, masterbates, etc, he's less likely to explore IRL things like that. It tends to be the other way around, you start small and build up.

Half the time the worse people in history could have been stopped early with proper attention from shrinks.

Some people enjoy forgetting the very basic definition of art as it suits their own personal needs it seems.  If you sit and deny self expression in this genre of drawing, then you cannot defend it as "Art", and must simply say it's 'drawn' and nothing more.

"Art" is not a catch all term just because you wish to be seen in slightly more favourable light for drawing such an unbecoming topic.

>>15

cubcentral , fur affinity too.

>>13

>>12

Not really, because admitting you're a pedophile in today's society, even if you have never had any remote inclination to actually act out, but are still attracted to things that are prepubescent, you get a label that's impossible to shake off, and will likely disqualify you from getting a job, any type of job.

And you just proved to be really ignorant, I know 3 artists that draw cub art, and although I know that any original art they draw is essentially them putting their fantasies down, it really doesn't effect me. None of them have ever made any sort of inclination that they would ever do any sort act like that towards a real child, and I know I sure as hell wouldn't, and they take major offense to being called pedophiles, because that implies you're attracted to *real* kids, and none of them are.

>>18

Sexual reproduction is the most basic of human desires, everyone has it, it's essentially a need to reproduce, but it's the only need we have that you can go your entire life without and not die. But it IS a need in the human psyche.

>>9
Yea, there are people like that, but look at the volume of loli and shota they produce in Japan, then look at thier crime stats. People who kidnap children are fucked up to begin with, besides, you're giving the same basic argument as the moral police:

-Real porn makes men rapists
-Violent video gams make murders out of kids
-FURRY MAKES YOU A DOG FUCKER

you're no different, and no one can say what art is because art cannot be defined, who has a right to define what art is? drawings are fictional representations of thoughts and ideas

"this is not a pipe"
http://foucault.info/documents/img/notapipe/Magritte-pipe.jpg

>>21
Your arguement wouldn't stand up in court:
http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/lawpoli/isp-licensing/2002102601.php

Art in person and over the net are *two* different things in this country.

>>24
"My argument" wouldn't stand up in court?  Sorry, I didn't make an argument, I quoted the Criminal Code of Canada and provided a link to the actual text.  Somehow that seems a more ligitamate source of info (the Criminal Code as provided by a federal government site) than some law students interpretation of bill C-234 on his homepage. 

The day someone actually gets busted for *only* fictional/imaginary works (IE: drawings and wrintings not dipicting a real child), spends time in jail, AND isn't vindicated by the supreme court over turening his conviction by some backwater Alberta judge a few years later, is the day you can tell me I'm wrong and get any reaction other than scorn and laughter. 

Untill then, haha.  Whatever. 

Wow, a day later and a good number of replies to a post I made last night at a tired, annoyed, and rantful hour.

Aside from all the legal wrangling, aside from attempts to dislodge this thread into a 'Your Fetish IS Just As Bad' thread, I'd like to hear someone actually defend cub art. I'd like to hear from you, the guy that visits cubcentral regularily and jacks off to this.

Can you honestly defend it? Aside from the first amendment, aside from legality, can you honestly tell me that there's nothing shameful, or morally wrong in masturbating to such images?

>>28

You'll just get the same shit that you get from the people who like bestiality in the thread below this one.

>>28
I defend it as one of many furry kinks that I have that don't transfer into reality. For instance, I LOVE... LOOOOOVE furry gay porn, but I'm not gay, I don't even think human guys are attractive. I also look at fur-scat sometimes, but I nearly puked seeing REAL scat porn on 4chan's /b/.

I'm one kinky mu-fugguh when it comes to furry stuff, but when it comes to reality, fuck no, I'm very vanilla.. in fact the ONLY kink that transfers from furry to reality is my interest in female feet.

Also despite defending cub, gay fur porn, and toilet play in furry drawings, I hate rape, haaaate rape images.. literally makes me sick to my stomach to see non-con...

explain that.

>>28
  Shame and morality are cultural constructs, and my cultural programming never sank in when I was a child.  Thus, I don't feel the need to defend what I like, and that probably makes me a sick fuck according to you. 

Lucky for me, your opinion has no bearing on my life, and therefore I can ignore your whining and sniffling "ew it's gross" bullshit with complete impunity. 

As for wanting to understand, well, hey...  That's humankind's eternal refrain, isn't it?  "Help, help, I don't understand!" 

(Spot the reference, win a prize!)

Get used to it, bucko, because with as much smarts and wisdom as you're packing around, I'm guessing not having a fucking clue is probably par for the course.  But fear not, you're not alone - ignorance and stupidity is the norm around here, and if majority rules at least you can force your ill-witted opinions and point of view on to the rest of us. 

And wow, I should just copy and paste this rant to the bestiality thread - It all applies there as well.  Long Live Ignorance! 

>>31

It's illegal in Canada.  The courts recognize furry art as being the same as pictures of people when it comes to that sort of thing.  However, cherubs, and the like, are not considered child pornography, because the authorities are sophisticated enough to tell the difference between art/history, and smut/closet pedo junk, so no need to worry about art beiing completely censored.

Mind you, they aren't likely to arrest someone with Lolicon/Shota/Cub stuff unless they A) also have a history as a sex offender, or B) have actual photographs on their computer as well.  Thus, it's legal to possess Vladimir Nabokov's Lolita, but not legal to possess some disturbed fan fiction about molesting Dora the Explorer... unless you can prove you were doing it as a study, but even if you were, Pedophile is the modern day witch hunt. If there's even a hint that you might be, you'd better hope you have a hell of a lawyer.

>>35

Well, in his defense, I've known people with a lot of kinks, and a good chunk of them are like you: Fantasy only, and never, EVER reality.  Then there are those who are like "Dayum, if only..." and they get this serious look on their faces.  At that point, I'm usually like "Yeah buddy, you stay the fuck away from my sister", because I'm not willing to take that risk.

Also, you never know what people have been through, and I always find it odd how this site shows enormous support for what I consider truly minor issues (the rights of the artist to control the distribution of their smut), while what I consider comparatively major issues (fantasy pedophilia) is usually met with the 4Chan-like "GTFO My Interweb!"

Me... as long as it never touches reality, that's cool... but I still think it's weird that someone is on the defensive because they DON'T like depictions of child rape.

>>38

but those people who DO hurt others over thier kinks have something wrong with them in the first place. its like back in the 80's when parents tried to prove that every single kid that listened to black sabbath would kill someone