deviantART's new policies on Nudity & Erotic Work and the Erotic Fanart Controversy
There has always been a problem with what certain groups of people persive as and is accepted as appropriate for the general public. Why is there such a taboo about the human body? Where does artistic nudity cross over into the erotic?
The admins of devianART try to define that in there newly clarified Mature Content polices. These new 'revisions' are reasonably sound and I find that the new clarifications will be helpful to me sorting and putting the proper filters on any of my future pieces that fall under any of those categories if I were to create them and then chose to upload on that site.
I had only skimmed the last bit about fictional and anthropomorphic section. It seemed to be just seemed to repeat the list of categories already stated and seemed to be directed toward more to furry artists then general fan-artists.
Then I read this rant about adult fanworks based off 'children's entertainment'. Now, I can understand the guy's need to speak out about this sort of thing. Child abuse and pornography is a serious offense and is not a thing to be taken lightly. DeviantART has always made it clear that they do not tolerate any type of child erotica on their site for, like R2 had stated, moral and legal reasons. And some artists have used the excuse of slapping poorly constructed "disclaimer" on their artist comments saying that the character they drew laying naked in a pool of white goop was of legal age. Even if their apparent age is very much questionable.
Personally, I am very much disturbed by the erotic fanart that's out there that depicts Disney and Nickelodeon characters that are really from shows geared towards prepubescent children. Even when they are of 'legal' age in their original content or 'aged'. Lazy Town and Rugrats porn? NO please.
But in regards to most Anime based fanwork, there is only a fraction of animated works coming out of Japan (and other countries) that are considered children's entertainment. Anime is not a genre all in it's self. No matter how people like to make generalizations and make the mistake of thinking "Oh, well since it's animated it's for children." Sorry, but if you think that you are gravely mistaken.
So when R2 rants about how the "freaks" are using the excuse of creating or using "epilogue" episodes or chapters (where the characters are aged into legal adults in canon) it make something to fap at. Stating that it does not count because the majority of the content prior to that the characters are a minor. Concidereing all the contect of fanart that is was? on deviantART that depected characters that were minor's in their original context but are depected as two concenting adults in the fanworks, I find it a bit hard to swallow that this has always been the grounds of submission deletions and banning of individuals. Also, according to some of the backlash and comments from this post, characters that are established adults in canon are also roped into this catagory mearly because they are from "children's programing."
I just can't help but feel a bit offended and decesive about it. This has already caused a lot of raged enduced outbursts (some less then mature than others) from the Anime fan community and it's bound to create more. Especially with R2's snarky and ass-hatty tone in his blog.
Fine. Whatever. I'll merely upload my 'erotic' fanart at Y!gallery or here. (with all the right warnings and filters of course) Which I mostly do anyway. :shurg:
Now after my initial reaction of "R2, you're an ass-hat, but I understand where you're coming from", I went clicked back to the policy updates to double check that I've got the right mature filters on the works that I have in my devART gallery and then actually read the bit about fictional art and I literally felt the my guts twist:
(copypasted)
Fictional characters present unique difficulties in that a large percentage of anthropomorphic characters are presented without clothing, which is nearly standard for all children’s cartoons featuring “funny talking animals”. Characters ranging from Bugs Bunny to Sonic the Hedgehog have been presented to the public “naked” on untold occasions and should be considered the “standard” for judging acceptable anthropomorphic or fictional character nudity.
Oh, okay. So it's alright for the "funny talking animals" from those children's program shows to be seen flashing their junk around, but you can't draw the fictional human adults that way? hmm.. Seems a bit of a hypocrisy in that. Especially since some of those same furry characters are under the legal age of adulthood. Sonic, from what I remember from the animated cartoon is a teenager under the age of 18. I doubt that his age has changed that much in the other media that he is in either.
Yeah, way to go R2. So nice of you for another reason for anime and furry communities to get all in a pissy with each other. blarg.
The admins of devianART try to define that in there newly clarified Mature Content polices. These new 'revisions' are reasonably sound and I find that the new clarifications will be helpful to me sorting and putting the proper filters on any of my future pieces that fall under any of those categories if I were to create them and then chose to upload on that site.
I had only skimmed the last bit about fictional and anthropomorphic section. It seemed to be just seemed to repeat the list of categories already stated and seemed to be directed toward more to furry artists then general fan-artists.
Then I read this rant about adult fanworks based off 'children's entertainment'. Now, I can understand the guy's need to speak out about this sort of thing. Child abuse and pornography is a serious offense and is not a thing to be taken lightly. DeviantART has always made it clear that they do not tolerate any type of child erotica on their site for, like R2 had stated, moral and legal reasons. And some artists have used the excuse of slapping poorly constructed "disclaimer" on their artist comments saying that the character they drew laying naked in a pool of white goop was of legal age. Even if their apparent age is very much questionable.
Personally, I am very much disturbed by the erotic fanart that's out there that depicts Disney and Nickelodeon characters that are really from shows geared towards prepubescent children. Even when they are of 'legal' age in their original content or 'aged'. Lazy Town and Rugrats porn? NO please.
But in regards to most Anime based fanwork, there is only a fraction of animated works coming out of Japan (and other countries) that are considered children's entertainment. Anime is not a genre all in it's self. No matter how people like to make generalizations and make the mistake of thinking "Oh, well since it's animated it's for children." Sorry, but if you think that you are gravely mistaken.
So when R2 rants about how the "freaks" are using the excuse of creating or using "epilogue" episodes or chapters (where the characters are aged into legal adults in canon) it make something to fap at. Stating that it does not count because the majority of the content prior to that the characters are a minor. Concidereing all the contect of fanart that is was? on deviantART that depected characters that were minor's in their original context but are depected as two concenting adults in the fanworks, I find it a bit hard to swallow that this has always been the grounds of submission deletions and banning of individuals. Also, according to some of the backlash and comments from this post, characters that are established adults in canon are also roped into this catagory mearly because they are from "children's programing."
I just can't help but feel a bit offended and decesive about it. This has already caused a lot of raged enduced outbursts (some less then mature than others) from the Anime fan community and it's bound to create more. Especially with R2's snarky and ass-hatty tone in his blog.
Fine. Whatever. I'll merely upload my 'erotic' fanart at Y!gallery or here. (with all the right warnings and filters of course) Which I mostly do anyway. :shurg:
Now after my initial reaction of "R2, you're an ass-hat, but I understand where you're coming from", I went clicked back to the policy updates to double check that I've got the right mature filters on the works that I have in my devART gallery and then actually read the bit about fictional art and I literally felt the my guts twist:
(copypasted)
Fictional characters present unique difficulties in that a large percentage of anthropomorphic characters are presented without clothing, which is nearly standard for all children’s cartoons featuring “funny talking animals”. Characters ranging from Bugs Bunny to Sonic the Hedgehog have been presented to the public “naked” on untold occasions and should be considered the “standard” for judging acceptable anthropomorphic or fictional character nudity.
Oh, okay. So it's alright for the "funny talking animals" from those children's program shows to be seen flashing their junk around, but you can't draw the fictional human adults that way? hmm.. Seems a bit of a hypocrisy in that. Especially since some of those same furry characters are under the legal age of adulthood. Sonic, from what I remember from the animated cartoon is a teenager under the age of 18. I doubt that his age has changed that much in the other media that he is in either.
Yeah, way to go R2. So nice of you for another reason for anime and furry communities to get all in a pissy with each other. blarg.