fchan

discussion

Quick Question

Pages:1
1Report
Buster at 7 Dec 2006: 20:36

Why do people constantly object to things being posted, rather than just skip over them? It causes so much drama.

If you don't like something, the logical and mature thing to do is just bypass it altogether, and yet day after day people will complain about how something is "wrong" or "disgusting" instead of just ignoring it altogether and forgetting it's there.

Why is that? Is it some deep-seated need to have control where you have none? Is it moral stigma? Is it simply jaded arrogance? What is it?

2Report
at 7 Dec 2006: 21:48

You answered your own question, "the logical and mature thing".  The people that tend to do the bitching are neither.

3Report
Havoc at 7 Dec 2006: 22:00

>>1
So if you saw someone being raped while walking down the street, you'd just stop looking and walk on past? You wouldn't speak up and tell somebody, or in some other way express your horror? You'd, as you put it, "ignore it altogether" and forget it was there?

Next you'll make the argument that it's not real life and therefore my argument is flawed. But I think that how we treat these kind of circumstances is indicative of how we treat real life.

Now, can we draw the line somewhere, please? I'm pretty sure it's unacceptable to do a lot of the things in art that is currently allowed on fchan. Shouldn't it be just as unacceptable to fantasize about such things?

Hypothetically, let's say your brother, father, mother, sister, or any other relative fantasizes about some of the things that some fchan.meers enjoy fantasizing about. How would you feel about that? I'm willing to bet you wouldn't be comfortable around those people, and you would probably not want those people to be around you anymore.

Well, the fandom is the same way. The majority of furries don't like it any more than I do. But some furries have this sense that anything goes because we are the lowest common denominator in society. The thought never seems to occur that that is BECAUSE there's the sense of anything goes.

4Report
Buster at 7 Dec 2006: 22:13

>>3

You missed the point entirely, not that I should be surprised. I didn't say "Hey, if you saw someone being raped on the street, would you stop them? I sure wouldn't!"

Fantasy and reality are 2 different things, strangely enough. Despite what you may think, this art is just fantasy and nothing more. And, unlike some people *cough cough*, I don't honestly care what people's fetishes are unless I'm dating them. If they want to fantasize about having sex with children, let them FANTASIZE about it. If I catch them doing it, or find out that they have been, you can be damn sure that I'd call the cops.

See, that's the thing. The so called "line" doesn't exist in the realm of fantasy. So long as it isn't real, it doesn't matter. Is that concept really so terribly difficult to grasp?

5Report
Havoc at 7 Dec 2006: 22:24

>>4
I'm grasping the concept very well, actually. I'm just calling your bullshit. Everyone who enjoys fantasizing about having sex with children, raping someone, or killing someone is a child molester, rapist, or murderer waiting to happen. Unless you thought that those kind of people just out of the blue decided one day to do what they did?

So it does matter. It matters very much.

Has it never occurred to you that there are some things that just should not be tolerated?

6Report
Buster at 7 Dec 2006: 22:30

>>5

That's bullshit and you know it. If you refuse to accept THAT, though, then answer me this.

What's worse: these criminals waiting to happen suddenly breaking out and doing what they fantasize about, or them having a medium to draw or to look at what it is they fantasize about so they don't do it?

And if what you said really is the case, how is banning those kinds of art going to remove these people from society? It isn't. They'll still be there, even if the art isn't.

There's no reason to go around complaining about it besides being a narrow-minded. You only see what it is you want to see, not what's really there. If this art stops even 10% of the child rapist killers that're out there, then that's 10% less of them that are out there now, right?

7Report
at 7 Dec 2006: 22:57

I love how people blame the art for somebody that goes and decides to do what that art depicts.

Because honestly, it's that person's lack of self-control and morality that is the TRUE cause of these crimes.

8Report
Havoc at 7 Dec 2006: 22:59

>>6
I'd rather fchan not condone these fantasies. If they're gonna draw or look at it, let them make their own art board for it so the people with normal (and since we are furries, that is a relative term, I admit) sexual interests don't have to be associated with it. Notice I didn't say "look at it," because I don't, but there is such a thing as guilt by association.

Isn't that what cubcentral was created for anyway?

9Report
Buster at 7 Dec 2006: 23:01

>>8

Did you miss the sections labled /A/ and /AH/ or something?

I'm surprised you're not over at CC and bitching at them. Then again, for all I know, you are.

But you concede that drawing these fantasies is better than acting them out. That's all there is to it, nothing more.

10Report
Couger at 7 Dec 2006: 23:03

>>5 havoc
first; if enough in the fandom were trully botherd then there would be far less of those who are offensive towards your ideals
second; if those things trully bother you so much
then perhaps this fandomn is not a place you should be?

11Report(capped)
nobody#Mod at 7 Dec 2006: 23:09

Hey, come on you guys.  Everybody has valid points to make, but you're not presenting them in a good way.  Please try not to be so accusatory towards one another.  That’s not good because it generates bad feelings and causes drama. Besides, have you ever heard the phrase “You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.”?  People will be more willing to listen to you if you aren’t mad at them.

I don’t mean to offend anyone; I’m just trying to keep things from getting out of hand.  And I am afraid things are getting a little too heated.  So lets all try to be civil, please.  Thanks in advance! ^^

12Report(capped)
Raven at 7 Dec 2006: 23:26

Havoc. I must clarify something for you.

Fchan does not "condone" anything. Fchan is a place for furry-type artwork to be shared and advertised. As I have said before, there are plenty of things on the site I do not like. But I deal with it.

It works like this: You do not have to like something. You can think it's horrible. But you cannot control other people. And arguing about it in a thread and creating drama doesn't help anything. All it does is make our job harder.

So bottom line: Hate something all you want and share your opinions here on /dis in a civil way. But do NOT bring it onto the image boards and into the threads. We will not tolerate that. I think that was the case the OP was trying to state, anyway.

Just letting to know.

13Report
Havoc at 8 Dec 2006: 07:38

>>12
I'm not sure what you mean by "does not condone" stuff that you allow to be posted here. That's kind of like a general saying he doesn't condone the torture that he allows his soldiers to perform.

If you allow it, you condone it, because you aren't displaying any discouragement of it.

14Report
Havoc at 8 Dec 2006: 07:52

>>12
Apologies for the double post, but:

Condone
con-done: tr.v To overlook, forgive, or diregard without protest or censure.

That seems to be exactly what is happening.

15Report
at 8 Dec 2006: 08:56

>>14
Are you being deliberately obtuse or just can't wrap your head around the concept that fantasies and drawings of things are not the things themselves?

The images are condoned here- not the activity.

As to the balance of your arguments- it's pretty obvious that you should be locked up before you assault or murder someone as, unless you're the reincarnation of Mother Theresa, you've imagined doing violence at least once in your life. Turn yourself in to the local Thought Police please, Citizen.

16Report
Havoc at 8 Dec 2006: 09:07

>>15
Poor wording on my part. I didn't mean to imply that fchan was condoning the acts themselves.

17Report
at 8 Dec 2006: 12:47

This is a strange post to see on fchan in my oppinion. as far as wanting to take so many things off this site (IE rape/cub/gutting/vore) because you wouldnt like people fanticizing  about it, why? so what if someone in your family fanticizes about that stuff, that garbage your saying right there is not different than, say, you wanting to go screw any given animal, i mean furs are half animal half human as a rule as far as i know, so why shouldnt it be close enough to doing it with an animal as it is to doing it with an actual person. they (your family/friends/ect.) would have every right to disown you for that fetish, hell the way i see it, is this site not really just one big fetish?

18Report(capped)
Xenofur at 8 Dec 2006: 13:15

As long as images fit the stated context of the site (anthropomorphic art); do not break any american or british laws; do not break any existing site laws; and are posted in the correct board, there will be no further restrictions on content to be posted.
Nobody is forced to view content they do not agree with, due to the board seperation and the collapsible threads.
Enacting any restrictions despite this would be as hilariously stupid as forbidding violent video games on grounds of them possibly leading unstable persons to commit violent acts.

19Report(capped)
Raven at 8 Dec 2006: 15:03

Havoc, stop being difficult. Arguing semantics with me only makes it look like you're being an ass on purpose.

The fact is, we do not necessarily LIKE the content. But we are going to be fair about it. You don't like? Then you may stop viewing the site at any time in order to avoid seeing these things. It's THAT simple.

End of line.

20Report
at 8 Dec 2006: 21:00

>>5 "Everyone who enjoys fantasizing about having sex with children, raping someone, or killing someone is a child molester, rapist, or murderer waiting to happen."

What does any of this have to do with furry art?  Cub art is not RL children.  RL children are discusting stinky little vermine.  Cub art is cute and completely fantasy.  Fantasy because furry cubs don't exist.

I sometimes fantasize about fucking one of Giger's aliens.  By your logic that must mean I have a fetish for cockroaches since aliens are bug like and hard to kill.  Sorry bud, Aliens are fantasy.  I stomp on cockroaches!

21Report
Havoc at 8 Dec 2006: 21:23

>>19
I'm not TRYING to be an ass, but I'm sorry if I'm coming off that way. I'm just trying to express my opinion. If it makes sense to nobody except me, then I'll just drop it.

22Report
Buster at 8 Dec 2006: 21:27

>>21

Havoc, you were being a jackass. There's no two ways around it. Even if it wasn't what you were trying to do, it was what you were doing.

And you also weren't just trying to express your opinion, either. You were trying to convince me, and everyone else, that your views were the absolute truth of the matter. That was what you were doing since the very first post.

23Report
at 8 Dec 2006: 21:29

>>20
"RL children are discusting stinky little vermine."

That's exactly why some people rape children, because they believe that they are objects rather than human beings. And when they get caught, they will respond that the child deserved it, that it was looking for trouble and that the experience was pleasurable for both the adult and the child.

24Report
Havoc at 8 Dec 2006: 21:41

>>22
I have to speak just one more time, then I'm done.

"You were trying to convince me, and everyone else, that your views were the absolute truth of the matter."

You are guilty of that as well. Don't try to pin that on just me.

26Report(capped)
nobody#Mod at 8 Dec 2006: 21:48

Alright! ^^ Things seemed to have calmed down a bit.  Hurray!

Now then, I’m going to try to answer the questions posed in the original post. >>1 I think they bring up important issues that need to be discussed.  But before that, I want to make it clear that I don’t intend any offense towards anyone at any point throughout this message.  Really, I’m very sorry if anyone feels insulted when they read this; I apologize in advance.

With that said, let’s look at the first question: "Why do people constantly object to things being posted, rather than just skip over them?"

That's a great question!  But before we can come to a conclusion answer, we have to establish some facts.

First of all, everyone knows that each individual person has a unique and distinctive personal opinion, right?  That is to say, no two people think the same way.  Since this is true, and considering that everyone doesn't believe in a single moral truth, it can be said that everyone will have different beliefs on moral issues, especially in the case of determining what is right.

Then, every individual will have at least some idea in their mind about what is right.  This also means they will have an idea of what is wrong, what doesn't fit into their definition of right.  And in moral terms, what is right is good and what is wrong is bad, correct?  Therefore, when something doesn't fit into one's definition of right it will be perceived as bad.

Not everyone will object to something, even if it doesn't fit into their definition of right and they view it to be bad.  The conscientious objectors, by the very nature of their objections, express a desire to do away with what they think is bad in favor of what they believe is good. 

I, personally, believe this to be a just and righteous thing.

There, that's my take on why people feel the desire to express their opinions and object to certain things. 

In addition, blarg! XP I typed that about three different ways and it still doesn't sound right.  I hope everybody know what I'm trying to say; I'm really bad at explaining things.

At this point, while I don't want to be redundant, I do think what Raven said needs to be reiterated.  I approve of standing up for what you believe in, but there are proper and improper ways to do it.  If you disapproved of the Vietnam War, breaking down the doors of a VFW meeting and yelling about how everyone there is horrible would be an improper way of expressing your opinion.

And like Raven said, the proper place for this kind of discussion is /dis/.  Which is why I'm glad people are talking about it here.  Huzzah! ^^

Now then, I'm going to get into the issue that composes the bulk of this thread.  I think this is a good time to remind everyone that I'm not accusing anyone or trying to make them look bad.  I don't mean to be insulting or impertinent.  Again, I'm really sorry if I offend anyone.

There appear to be two sides to this argument, one side supporting the removal of...some undefined offensive content, and the other side supporting the retaining of said undefined content.  Generic-ky! ^^

Anyways, I think there are at least some valid and invalid points to both sides, so I'm going to try to cover what I see being said.

It seems like the main point for sides of the discussion involves the issue of whether artwork that features inappropriate acts implies execution of said acts or not.  This is certainly a very reasonable and understandable fear.  I'm going to quote >>5 for this, because I think he sums it up nicely:

"Everyone who enjoys fantasizing about having sex with children, raping someone, or killing someone is a child molester, rapist, or murderer waiting to happen."

The supporting point to this is a simple but strong one, with roots in both Sigmund Freud's ID and Socrates'/Plato's appetites: people have a will to act out their base desires.  People will naturally eat not only to survive but also because it is pleasurable, and they have sex not only to procreate but also...because it's pleasurable.  And suddenly voraphilia makes more sense... ;)

But anyways, by the same token people have a will to control themselves (even if it doesn't seem like it over the internet).  Freud called this the Superego, and you use it every time you don't maul someone who makes you do something you don't want to do.

Now whether you believe these people or not (I'm not that big a fan of Freud myself), obviously people have the ability to overcome primal urges.  Otherwise everyone's boss everywhere would be very dead.  Not to mention all civilization as we know it would never have developed, and etc.

Furthermore, it may very well be the case that these fantasies don't stretch outside the furry fandom.  If people were indeed attracted to these things happening, why would they go to fchan instead of sites with the actual content?

Actually to explore that concept some more, lets pretend that all cub furs are child molesters, all voraphiles eat people, all snake cock fans are looking for some freaky kind of surgery, and O.J Simpson didn't do it.  Let's then say they we have obtained the power of the King of Internets and can take all images depicting this stuff off the web.  Now, instead of being on the internet they're out on the streets, committing these acts.

However, all that's reasoning for the artwork in general.  Later, it's suggested that these things are okay on the web, just not on fchan.

Well then, lets look at the practical application of removing offensive content from fchan.  Up until now whatever this offensive content is has remained very vague.  But we can all agree that we would have to set up rules to be enforced, right?

In that case, who would decide what is offensive and what isn't?  I don't think any one person would be qualified to do that, would you?  After all, any one person's definition of right wouldn't match up completely with anyone else's.  Even some people that express extreme displeasure with certain offense material may be perfectly okay with content that others would find offensive.  For example, I've seen a person argue against the presentation of violence and murder in images, but that same person had no qualms against cub art.

So, what other options do we have?  Well, if we wanted to try and make everyone happy, we could remove and content people said offended them.  That would make all the stuff in /ah/ and /a/ go away pretty quick.  And I'm sure people don't like seeing their childhood raped, and others who are disturbed by the unnaturalness of herms, so /toon/ and /h/ would have to be taken down.  Oh, and while we're on the subject of unnaturalness you know there are people who don't approve of gay relationships.  I hope by now I've gotten my point across and don't need to mention how people disapprove of furries and even pornography in general.

On that note, I'm thinking it's about time I brought this post to a close.  This thread has gotten 8 more replies since I began typing, and it looks like to conversation is kind of coming to a close.  Plus, I need to get something to eat. ;)  But before food I do think I should tell everyone that it's not good to yell at each other again. Disagreements are a fine and sometimes even a good thing, but it should be done in a proper and civil manner.

Thank you all for your time!

27Report
CJ Krythos at 8 Dec 2006: 23:35

>>26
lol, better knock on wood before you say things have calmed down  ^.^

28Report
at 9 Dec 2006: 00:42

>>26
 dang, i cant even believe i read ALMOST all of that....

29Report
at 9 Dec 2006: 11:22

>>26
Just a moment of off-topicness, but you mentioned Freud... You're behind the times. Nowadays, his theories are considered  well-meaning quackery. He still keeps his pioneer of psychiatry label, but even some aspects of the weirdness of Jung are taken more seriously.

30Report
at 10 Dec 2006: 04:41

>>29

So is that why I studied and learned so much Freud in college psychology classes?

The big problem with psychology and psychiatry is that it's all still basically theoretical. The only science we can associate with the mind is how the brain functions and how those functions effect our thought-patterns.

In the end, we don't really KNOW how the mind works. Although we're close (or think we are.)

31Report
Nequ#3LrT5NRVks at 10 Dec 2006: 19:02

I am trying hard to not refer to  WWII.

Trying *reeeal* hard.

32Report
at 10 Dec 2006: 23:43

>>30
Yeah, I'm sure they put a heavy emphasis on the role penis envy plays and how schizophrenia is due to repression and might be amenable to the "talking cure." :)

33Report
Karvak at 12 Dec 2006: 00:56

Amen to the skipping part. I may be a lurker at heart, but I tend to just take what I like, close what I don't, and skip what I really don't like. Works.

34Report
Daine at 14 Dec 2006: 00:15

...and this is whi I love /dis/... DRAMA! XD

35Report
Some Random Dude at 14 Dec 2006: 01:35

Trolls are -really- strong, y'know.  Don't fuck with them.  They'll eat your flesh. :D

/sarcasm >.>

Honestly, I'm open-minded.  I can fap to a LOT of things.  First I loved catgirls.  Then I realized that I like the cute aspect of loli.  Do I like childporn?  God no.  It's real, and not so cute at all.  Something about the big eyes, etc etc gets me going.  Vore kinda turns me on.  Do I eat cows?  HELL YES I EAT COWS.  Do I eat human flesh?  Oh hell, I certainly hope not.  That's disgusting.  Something happened early in my childhood without any previous influence at all.  I imagined a T-Rex eating me whole.  I didn't get boned at all, I was too young.  But I did feel my chest and belly stir.  It makes absolutely no fucking sense, but it happened.  Blah...  Blah...  Blah.

If you want to draw the line somewhere, then fine.  That's your own personal line.  Don't look at the crap that crosses your own personal boundries.  Look at the titles before the images, if that helps.  I stay the hell away from /toon/.  Does that mean I think everyone who posts in there and faps to it are sick freaks?  Nah, it's not my place to judge.  It's not my place to judge what I close my mind to.  That's my own personal opinion, anyway.  But don't take that statement too literally.  If someone's raping my mother, you bet there's gonna be an aluminum bat clashing with the back of his head.

Man, that's my fucking mom.  You don't rape my mom.  That's fucked up.   ...Seriously.

36Report
Dalamin at 14 Dec 2006: 17:02

Its a little annoying hearing people complain... "I went into the /ah/ section, and there was like, this picture, like, of a skunk spraying another fur with piss, while eating a bucket full of shit and cum, while getting its testicles ground through a meat grinder... Im completely offended!"
From here one should look up 'Darwinism and YOU'.

37Add Reply
Name Sage? - captcha =
First Page - Last 40 - Entire Thread

Powered by: Shiichan Version 3956
The contents of this page are asserted to be in the public domain by the posters.
The administrators claim no responsibility for thread content.
Manage