Tag: Discussion

solarhedonist:

((Regarding all the talk of non-consenting depictions of people’s OC and personas in sexual situations:

It’s being over thought now. This isn’t something that needs to be debated to death. It’s something every fully functional human brain should already know the answer to.

You do not do things that could creep out, upset or otherwise harm another human being without asking them first. Period. It’s called basic consideration. You should really have the empathy to process that without being told. It shouldn’t be hard to understand or need a massive debate.

In the specific case of Lauren’s OC, she has said on her own DA page when asked that she doesn’t like it. It makes her uncomfortable and weirds her out.

There you go. End of discussion. The lady said no. Stop it. You do not have a right or permission. In fact, you have a request to not do it.

Done. 

…and if that isn’t enough to close the issue for you, then you lack a full range of human senses and decency and probably need to see a therapist or whoever can teach you more about right and wrong since your parents clearly failed.))

I think this is going the other way of oversimplification. As they say, everything’s offensive.

ambris-waifu-hoard:

Exactly exactly exactly.

Even without the porn aspect, it’s still wrong to use someone else’s character for selfish reasons. Truth is, one could even invoke copyright laws in some cases. It’s effectively stealing someone else’s intellectual property. Using it for porn is adding insult to injury, but the more I think about the more I realize it’s not even acceptable when no porn is involved.

The only exception to the rule I can think of is when people drew Lauren’s OC as a gift to her; For a completely selfless reason. And unanimously, she really seemed to love that attention and those gifts.

Taking OC for one’s one selfish reasons without permission is just as bad as internet art theft.

Isn’t any Rule 34 (of a creative work, anyway), an invasion of copyright? Besides, one could argue fair use/fair dealing for parody or transformation (dramatically altering the work).

When it comes to real people, though, there are what are known as personality rights, that is, the right for people to control usage of their names or likenesses. I don’t know how legally applicable this is in the case of OCs.

The ever-relevant disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. Please consult a qualified professional for serious issues.

http://notaclopbanana.tumblr.com/post/78874419322/sending-out-an-sos-with-clop-perfection

needs-more-plot:

[Thread removed.]

I have some points and questions for both needs-more-plot/Ambris and notaclopbanana:

First, notaclopbanana says that “[t]his idea that it’s better to sexualize something many people identify with than what one person identifies with is just crazy” to you. But why? It seems we all understand Ambris’s/needs-more-plot’s response to this. The response to that from notaclopbanana seems to be: But on the other hand there are people who care very much but you’re not actually willing to change your behavior for them. But any fan can claim “ownership” of a public figure (celebrity or fictional character), but this is generally regarded as creepy or obsessive. No fan can claim legitimate ownership, so a fan’s wishes, no matter how strong, do not have to be respected.

But Lauren Faust, like any other person with an avatar (pony or not), indeed can claim legitimate ownership of a character. (I have some objections to notaclopbanana’s claim that needs-more-plot is singling out Lauren Faust; I’m confident that Ambris feels the same about other avatars.) I say “avatar” instead of “original character [OC]” because someone can create an OC that is a fictional character, not representing themselves; it seems that these should be treated differently.

But it makes me wonder, again: How much respect do they deserve? Do real people deserve more respect that fictional characters? Of course, real people shouldn’t be harassed (“spammed”) with any porn, much less Rule 34 of themselves. But I’m sure there are people who want to get with any given celebrity, so maybe they get off to or even draw a sexual image of that person.

It is morally wrong to take nude pictures of someone without their consent, but notaclopbanana correctly points out that this is mainly due to privacy concerns. Ambris, what do you think about sexual depictions of real people that don’t involve a breach of privacy, such as with look-alike actors or drawn depictions? If real people deserve this level of respect beyond freedom from harassment, why?

I don’t exactly understand why notaclopbanana sees Fausticorn as wholly separate from the real Lauren Faust; why is that? (The view that Rule 34 of a real public figure is okay doesn’t require this; after all, someone could draw a nude Lauren Faust with no invasion of privacy.)

However, I think notaclopbanana is correct in this response to needs-more-plot: That she looses [sic] the right to her personal self-expression the moment it’s posted on the internet?(No, again, false dichotomy. You have the right to not be harassed, you have the right to not have your work exploited for financial gain, you don’t really have the right to stop people from drawing porn.) After all, do celebrities lose total control over their likeness when people draw porn of them?

This is a very interesting issue, and I’d like to say that I don’t completely agree with either of these two positions.

http://notaclopbanana.tumblr.com/post/78874419322/sending-out-an-sos-with-clop-perfection

blazinroc88:

I have to admit, this is a good debate with strong points being made by both sides of the argument. The combatants are correct in everything they say. On one side, we ARE effectively stealing Fausticorn for our own purposes, and perhaps discouraging their use. On the other side, Lauren Faust, and her avatar Fausticorn, are NOT one in the same. They are two distinct figures, one of which is by many just connected to the other, out reverence or respect or as one side put it “hero worship”

This further presses the issue, “is it morally wrong to post r34 of Faust?” I would look at this issue as follows. Tara Strong and Andrea and Tabitha, they are all amazing VAs with dozens of characters within their repertoire. I mean, you can’t google “Teen Titans Raven” in standard search without getting at least one NSFW image. The point I am making it, these VAs KNOW that some people use the characters they voice in these manners. Raven, for example, has been nude, loved, and raped more times than at one point I could have ever cared to remember. In full knowledge of this, Tara still sometimes openly acts like Raven at the request of her fans, so I don’t think porn being made of a character particularly “steals” anything.

The flip side of this issue is that Lauren Faust, probably is not used to such attention and will not be as ready to ignore it as Tara might be. Truth be told, the first time she stumbled on R34 of her ponysona, she probably was creeped out. However, and made evident by the one arguers assertions, Faust also realizes that trying to stop people from making porn is a lost cause. Furthermore, nude art has existed for centuries, and although it is a little strange to be doing so with imaginary horses; there probably a couple clop artists who do what they do, as their HIGHEST form of praise and adulation. Trying to stop them IS a futile effort. They are not doing anything illegal, and until they are, no counter arguments really have anywhere to stand on.

In summation, with regards to it being “morally wrong to make/share r34 of the one called Fausticorn”. Is it really morally wrong? No, the raw truth, is NO it is NOT morally wrong to be doing these kinds of productions and sharing. Now “Is it OBJECTIVELY wrong?” Indeed! Yes it is objectively wrong, and by that, I mean it is subject to YOUR OWN approval on which side of this issue you fall. It is sort of like being gay within this judgmental society. Is it wrong to be gay? No, not at all; but no matter what you do (at least for the next 2-5 decades) there will be those of us on this world (me not being one) who think that being gay is wrong. If you don’t want to see r34 Fausticorn, fine, unfollow a blog and move on with your life. If you want to see it, more power to you, but do note that someone out their may be made a bit uncomfortable by what you are enjoying. The important thing here is to love and tolerate. Some people will be different than you, but, as long as no person or persons are being harmed by what anyone is doing. Where is the rub? (Shakespearean you people…read your Hamlet <3)

Thanks for this. (Though, judging by what you’ve said, I think you mean subjectively [depending on opinion], rather than objectively [based on fact].)

/t/post/78881858289/finally-found-it-spoiler-fausticorn-rule-34

Wow, and I didn’t even give my opinions in the first place!

needs-more-pony:

broniesagainstbullshit:

pinkiepony:

NSFW My Little Pony art: a guide

I’d put gore under NSFW as well. Although its a case by case basis, a lot of gore can be much worse than porn.

Otherwise, this is a good rule of thumb and can also be applicable to other series as well. Stuff listed under NSFW (including gore) and suggestive on this list are also stuff I recommend flagging when doing SafeSearchWrapUp.

If anyone does see people not tag stuff, click.

This this this this This THIS^^^

http://notaclopbanana.tumblr.com/post/78874419322/sending-out-an-sos-with-clop-perfection

solarhedonist:

heartlinda:

needs-more-plot:

Considering it’s her personal OC, and therefore HER, I think it’s incredibly wrong to make porn of her OC. Not to mention that she has gone on record as being incredibly creeped out at the idea.

Please have some respect, people.

I understand what you’re saying, but I wonder if it’s any different from pornographic depictions (“Rule 34”) of real celebrities. (They are out there.) I’m sure they would be creeped out by it just the same, so does that mean they should be given the same respect? Similarly, I’m sure most proprietors of entertainment franchises are creeped out by Rule 34; what does that say about such content as clop in general?

I’m not supportive of Fausticorn/VA OC clop; I’m just asking some questions.

((Jumping in… I think the line is when it’s a depiction of the individual. The OCs of the cast and crew should be off limits, especially to vile things like I’ve seen. I’ve seen Fausticorn raped. Multiple times, some including bloody torture. It’s out there. It’s horribly wrong.

Yes, celebrities should be given the same respect since in the case of live action, the character they play looks exactly like them most of the time… especially nude. 

Fictional characters are a different realm, but even then I think /some/ respect is needed. Let’s not have clop of murder porn for example. There are lines, and while fictional characters aren’t real, they still deserve some limits to how they’re treated by anyone that isn’t their creator/owner.))

This seems like a good standard.

(Hm…I’ve mostly seen cartoon-type Rule 34 of celebrities, though I admit I haven’t seen that much. But I suppose that doesn’t really matter.)

http://notaclopbanana.tumblr.com/post/78874419322/sending-out-an-sos-with-clop-perfection

needs-more-plot:

heartlinda:

notaclopbanana:

sending-out-an-sos-with-clop:

Perfection…

Artist: shinekolt

I’ve always heard that there was Rule 34 of Lauren Faust’s pony OC, but I never actually seen any until now.

Considering it’s her personal OC, and therefore HER, I think it’s incredibly wrong to make porn of her OC. Not to mention that she has gone on record as being incredibly creeped out at the idea.

Please have some respect, people.

I understand what you’re saying, but I wonder if it’s any different from pornographic depictions (“Rule 34”) of real celebrities. (They are out there.) I’m sure they would be creeped out by it just the same, so does that mean they should be given the same respect? Similarly, I’m sure most proprietors of entertainment franchises are creeped out by Rule 34; what does that say about such content as clop in general?

I’m not supportive of Fausticorn/VA OC clop; I’m just asking some questions.

http://needs-more-pony.tumblr.com/post/78581567906/dragondicks-needs-more-pony-dragondicks

(Original thread removed for length. Follow it through the link.)

I really have to agree with Ambris/needs-more-pony on this. I’ll respond to dragondicks’s last post.

there’s a difference between crushing on a character and redrawing them into an idealised body for the sake of sexual titillation. Guess which one my post was about :Y also guess which one the brony fandom does a hella lot of
I take it this is related to what I’ll call “altered-form” (anthropomorphic or humanized) ponies. The question that must be asked about these depictions is: Why would people bother with redrawing an existing character, rather than draw other porn with these bodies? Answer: I don’t think this is purely for sexual purposes. Rather, I think some people just can’t get off to a four-legged creature, regardless of their interest in the character, so they have to remedy it somehow.

like it doesn’t matter what your intent is if it’s “genuine affection” or what, when you draw porn of a character or person you are making them a sexual object. And we live in a society where women as a gender are constantly dehumanised and made into sexual objects, so I get irritated that even characters made to teach little girls that they don’t have to put up with that shit are reduced to it.
What? Ambris was right: This basically contradicts his whole previous post. I suppose the point should be repeated from there:
Crushing on fictional characters, in moderation, is plenty healthy too. Lots of people do it, men and women. And often, people achieve that sense of intimacy with a fiction character they desire through masturbation. This isn’t inherently a demeaning act. No more than a couple having sex is. Indeed, that’s exactly the feeling that people are striving for. It’s not a objectification, it’s just the opposite. They’re masturbating to a character because they want a wholesome complete relationship with that, but can’t, as the character is fictional. So they do the next best thing.

the porn industry is built on a foundation of abusing and dis-empowering women. Women in the industry are commonly sexually, physically and mentally abused and it is regarded as “just part of the job”. Porn is not a happy sparkly medium of gender equality. As I said in my original post, I think that drawn porn is good because there are no living actors in it to be abused like in live action porn. But a lot of the fucked up themes from live action porn carry over into drawn stuff, like control over women and women’s bodies.
Another logic lesson: This seems to be a genetic fallacy, which, in general, means something is discredited (or credited) because of its origins alone. Here the argument seems to be: Pornography is based on dis-empowering women, therefore it is inherently wrong/disempowering. There is a good point brought up, that “a lot of the fucked up themes from live action [sic] porn carry over into drawn stuff”; I presume these themes involve the dis-empowerment of women. But Ambris already addresses this:
Now, I can admit, not all guys who are into MLP are like what I just outlined. Some really are just into dis-empowering girls for their own titillation. But that is an issue with the person, not with the media or characters they do it do—because they’ll do it no matter what characters are involved.

sexual attraction may be natural, but you have control over what media you support when it comes to wank material. and I don’t want anything to do with media that takes characters intended to empower young girls, redraws them into more sexually appealing bodies and uses them as objects for gratification. I have higher standards than that.
This presumes that such redrawings are intended to turn these characters into objects. Granted, they are more sexually appealing to some (probably many) people, but that doesn’t mean that that’s the only reason. (See above.)

shadow-kaiskov:

valkyrstudios-deactivated201408:

Actually, I’d tell you to stick to the bigger sites like glue.

Here’s the thing about websites. The bigger and more popular they get, the more pressure they have from their audience to incorporate more and more features to make the site more accessible (and by extension bring in more ad revenue).

In fact, the sites that actually get the most (well deserved) criticism actually put in the most effort to do this.

Equestria Daily, the nucleus of the Brony Ego, filters most of it’s NSFW content off to a separate website, Equestria After Dark (which is preceded by Blogger’s usual Age Gate). Additionally, they offer the ability to browse the site in No Fanfiction Mode, which can (and will) filter out 90% of the site’s most worthless content. In fact, a new analysis show called “After The Fact” by Silver Quill is hosted there these days. These are a very funny (and safe for children, however they are a little bloated for most kids to comprehend) review show that looks more in depth into the show itself.

Derpibooru, one of the most toxic places for the community so far (aside from 4Chan) has taken great lengths to improve it’s filtering system. And most objectionable content is either filtered or spoilered by default. And you can easily avoid the vast majority of it’s horrid content by blacklisting the following tags: Suggestive, Questionable, Explicit, Grimdark, Semi-Grimdark, Image Macro, Meta. All the site really needs is an account setting to disable displaying comments on images (though disabling any and all Javascript can force this yourself until they do).

And most Tumblr blogs do in fact flag their content. And there is a well known Addon for most browsers that allow you to filter out particular tags you find on any objectionable content you find. And asking Tumblr Users to tag their content is not an unreasonable thing to ask.

Beyond that… that’s it, that’s all I know.

The only thing EQD and EQAD have in common is one of the EQD pre-readers being the guy running EQAD, but that’s all, he even started his own EQD

Huh, I never knew Alex ran Canterlot’s Finest.