Ambris, I think I have a problem…
Problem? What problem? I don’t see any problem? :p
I have a different problem: I didn’t even know about half of these!
Tag: Needs More Plot
http://notaclopbanana.tumblr.com/post/78874419322/sending-out-an-sos-with-clop-perfection
[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.
My very first clop vector! Hope you all like it!
Vector of this sketch by the amazing Artist Ambris!
Hey, Ambris, over here!
My rules give some explanation. (Everyone reads my rules, right? XD Maybe I should link to them everytime I mark “RULES VIOLATION" or “RULES WARNING”.)
Anyway, my first encounter with incest in furry (not exactly pornographic) was in “Better Days,” a webcomic by furry artist Jay Naylor. The chapter I linked is where it happens (or is heavily implied, anyway). That was probably my main turn-off to incest in pornography.
More generally, sexual reproduction between closely-related individuals is disadvantageous in natural selection, because it does not create as much genetic diversity. So there is a biological reason for avoiding incest, which could lead (justifiably, in my opinion) to the cultural avoidance of it.
However, I think incest has more to do with the relationship between the individuals. Adoptive siblings are not closely related biologically, but I would still consider sex between them incest. Family relationships (I think) are asexual (going back to the biological advantage), and since the relationship between adoptive children and other members of a family is about the same, I would still consider it incest (and thus wrong to some degree).
Now the Celestia-Luna exception. You might be referring to this post, in which I mention the exception; I also mention it in my rules. In the rules, I point to a clopfic, "Tipsy” by Anonymous Pegasus on FIMFiction, whose handling of the incest desensitizes it a bit to the cultural taboo.
More generally, I make the exception because, frankly, Celestia and Luna have a pretty flimsy claim for being “sisters.” All we have for that is the first episode, but there’s no history of their birth, their parents, or their childhood. (I doubt that they’re even sisters in the traditional biological sense.) Like I said, I think incest is about the relationship, so the fact that there isn’t much of this relationship between Celestia and Luna makes it seem less like incest than if the “sister” claim is taken on its face.
You know, I read that comic myself some time ago, so I know exactly the scene you’re talking about. I honestly don’t have a clue why that inherently makes it a turn-off.
For the record, I definitely don’t approve of long-term incestuous “relationships”, because things get entirely too complex on an emotional level. And I’ve always felt that efforts should be made that inbreeding never happens, for obvious reasons.
Personally, I find that reasoning for Celestia and Luna incest to be… odd. Flimsy logic even. But I guess if it works for you, more power to you.
I guess I struggle to understand why people are against incest porn.
To me, it’s simply a matter of having a good time with people you trust; as all sexual encounters should be. Why is that so bad?
I feel that, my stupidity aside, incest is just in the way for some people. I mean, I think about it like this: “Wow, that girl is pretty, shares the same interests as me, and we totally love each other’s company. Too bad she’s my sister.”
Sure, lack of genetic diversity, complex emotional issues yadda yadda. Whatever sort of reason or excuse. I know what it feels like to have a crush on a relative and never ever be able to tell them in fear of being completely outcast for being an inbred, incest freak. And I don’t think it should so negatively viewed. I think it’s just a word that gets in the way.
If I wanna love my cousin or sister or whatever on a deeper level because they’re everything I want in a mate regardless of being a relative or not, then I don’t think I should be shamed for it.
In re needs-more-plot and phagearchives:
I think it’s fine if you want to pursue whatever sexual relationship with a close relative, as long as it’s fine with both of you. But I’m siding with society in general in avoiding it because of the “antisexuality” of family relationships that arises from inbreeding concerns.
My rules give some explanation. (Everyone reads my rules, right? XD Maybe I should link to them everytime I mark “RULES VIOLATION" or “RULES WARNING”.)
Anyway, my first encounter with incest in furry (not exactly pornographic) was in “Better Days,” a webcomic by furry artist Jay Naylor. The chapter I linked is where it happens (or is heavily implied, anyway). That was probably my main turn-off to incest in pornography.
More generally, sexual reproduction between closely-related individuals is disadvantageous in natural selection, because it does not create as much genetic diversity. So there is a biological reason for avoiding incest, which could lead (justifiably, in my opinion) to the cultural avoidance of it.
However, I think incest has more to do with the relationship between the individuals. Adoptive siblings are not closely related biologically, but I would still consider sex between them incest. Family relationships (I think) are asexual (going back to the biological advantage), and since the relationship between adoptive children and other members of a family is about the same, I would still consider it incest (and thus wrong to some degree).
Now the Celestia-Luna exception. You might be referring to this post, in which I mention the exception; I also mention it in my rules. In the rules, I point to a clopfic, "Tipsy” by Anonymous Pegasus on FIMFiction, whose handling of the incest desensitizes it a bit to the cultural taboo.
More generally, I make the exception because, frankly, Celestia and Luna have a pretty flimsy claim for being “sisters.” All we have for that is the first episode, but there’s no history of their birth, their parents, or their childhood. (I doubt that they’re even sisters in the traditional biological sense.) Like I said, I think incest is about the relationship, so the fact that there isn’t much of this relationship between Celestia and Luna makes it seem less like incest than if the “sister” claim is taken on its face.
You know, I read that comic myself some time ago, so I know exactly the scene you’re talking about. I honestly don’t have a clue why that inherently makes it a turn-off.
For the record, I definitely don’t approve of long-term incestuous “relationships”, because things get entirely too complex on an emotional level. And I’ve always felt that efforts should be made that inbreeding never happens, for obvious reasons.
Personally, I find that reasoning for Celestia and Luna incest to be… odd. Flimsy logic even. But I guess if it works for you, more power to you.
I guess I struggle to understand why people are against incest porn.
To me, it’s simply a matter of having a good time with people you trust; as all sexual encounters should be. Why is that so bad?
I actually really loved the incest plot in better days and thought it was handled very well.
Then again, I like Jay Naylor’s work in general, so a lot of people would think my opinion is invalid.
In re needs-more-plot and sirfredrickoftrottingham on “Better Days”:
I have to admit that I wasn’t clear on why this scene in “Better Days” was a turn-off (EDIT: punctuation). To be honest, I have to admit that I don’t really know myself. That comic just made my head spin throughout, so I think it just made the “shock” of incest worse.
I guess I like Naylor’s work, but I tend to avoid it because a lot of times the creator gets pretty political (both within and without his fictional works). (Even this whole chapter in “Better Days” seemed to be just a political tract.)
Oh jeez, this turned out way longer than I expected!
On terminology: “Dickgirl” (or perhaps the rhyming “chicks with dicks”) is probably the most precise term to refer to what is being discussed here. I know that I use “androgyny” as well, but that refers to a much wider range of characteristics, some of which have nothing to do with anatomy.
This discussion is mainly inspired by an answer by needs-more-plot about why he enjoys this, reiterated when he describes “vicariously identifying…with the phallus in an image”. Essentially, he seems (based on these posts) to fantasize that the penis that is receiving pleasure is his.
Okay, I get that. But I disagree in terms of my personal preferences as a heterosexual male.
But first, some general commentary about guys being obsessed with penises.
This post highlights this obsession, and I thought it’d be fitting to respond here because it connects with the main subject.
I’ve never been obsessed with penises in the ways teenage boys are stereotypically. I guess the dominance theory is closest to what I’ve thought. The correlation between phallus length and dominance is an interesting point that I’ll bring up later.
Although I’m not obsessed in the stereotypical ways, I absolutely love dickgirls. One of my main pleasures is seeing a woman pleasured. A woman for me isn’t defined by her genitalia. In pornography, the factor on which I mostly rely is the figure (including breasts). So I get off especially to women getting off, you could say. (When I see a woman masturbating, I don’t imagine myself doing anything to her.)
The thing about penises is that I know what a penis feels like (rather obviously), so it’s easy to imagine what a woman with a penis feels. That’s it.
Well, that was it originally. The thing about penis length now comes in when I think about this drawing (clop, of a feral-form futanari Twilight Sparkle, by Boltswift). Her phallus is the same thickness as her hoof (not outlandish, but still pretty big and pushing the boundaries of reasonability). I’ll be honest right now: My main fantasy concerning this depiction is slowly running my tongue along the entire length of her phallus and listening to her moaning and panting… I wouldn’t properly fellate her, though. (Besides, I doubt I could in this case.)
Coming back from saucy to serious, I believe the length attraction isn’t due to “vicarious dominance”; it’s just because there’s more to pleasure.
http://needs-more-plot.tumblr.com/
It’s not “lurking” since I’ll actually respond to different posts. Lots of good discussion going on.