So this is a genuine question about all cub porn, this doesn’t come from hate or anything, im just genuinely asking how cub porn is allowed on this site without the government stepping in. Is it because the site is hosted in another country where it’s not necessarily illegal material/specified in any law, or is there some kinf of loophole or other reason that allows the posting, distribution, and consumption of cub porn?

Please be civil in the chat I don’t want people to jump in and write this off as hate, just give your genuine opinion and maybe even cite me some info about how this stuff can be safely shared around without getting in trouble.

Yeah, it's hosted in the United States of America. By constitution, "not realistic" art is allowed. The definition of this is debatable and different states build their own law beyond it, but they usually can't build a case off of it alone anyways, only attach it to real crimes and pretend the punishment was cub stuff.

furrin_gok said:
Yeah, it's hosted in the United States of America. By constitution, "not realistic" art is allowed. The definition of this is debatable and different states build their own law beyond it, but they usually can't build a case off of it alone anyways, only attach it to real crimes and pretend the punishment was cub stuff.

Ah i see, thanks for letting me know :>

I can never understand all that legal mumbo jumbo lol

It mostly boils down to the legal definition of pedophilia and the common definition of pedophilia. In America, pedophilia (the crime) involves REAL children; most of the time, drawings of children is written off as fantasy and is not acted upon. This means you can have a clearly fake image of a child, such as Kanna from MKDR or Edward from the comic School Days by Krezz, and not have legal action performed on you. However, photography of children in sexual situations or committing the act itself is illegal.

In contrast, some people decide to just label any form of artwork featuring underaged characters in sexual situations as "pedophilia". They typically don't know that there's a difference between fantasy and reality, or might know that there's a difference but not care. Now, IIRC if you are caught possessing or performing pedophilia and are being tried in the court of law, the drawn artwork can be used against you for profiling, stuff like "my client can't differ fantasy and reality" or "the defendant explicitly knew the boundaries of reality and fantasy, and chose to act in the way they did"... but possessing such artwork is not against the law by itself.

Now, e6 is hosted in America, so it falls under America's laws. If anyone's laws differ, they can use their blacklist to avoid young content, and indeed the default blacklist for viewers not using an account contains young -rating:safe as a blacklisted line, IIRC. In the end, if you're breaking the law and viewing "pedophile" content in a country that abhors it, it's on you and not e6. So, do be careful when creating an account or searching as to not disable your blacklist, unless you're OK with the possible consequences.

TL;DR: real life children and photos of children in sexual situations is legally pedophilia. Drawings or otherwise clearly fantasy depictions are not. E6 already upholds it's end of the "deal" by following American law and providing a default blacklist, so it's not breaking any rules by having "Cub" artwork on site.

post #2680780

siral_exan said:
It mostly boils down to the legal definition of pedophilia and the common definition of pedophilia. In America, pedophilia (the crime) involves REAL children; most of the time, drawings of children is written off as fantasy and is not acted upon. This means you can have a clearly fake image of a child, such as Kanna from MKDR or Edward from the comic School Days by Krezz, and not have legal action performed on you. However, photography of children in sexual situations or committing the act itself is illegal.

In contrast, some people decide to just label any form of artwork featuring underaged characters in sexual situations as "pedophilia". They typically don't know that there's a difference between fantasy and reality, or might know that there's a difference but not care. Now, IIRC if you are caught possessing or performing pedophilia and are being tried in the court of law, the drawn artwork can be used against you for profiling, stuff like "my client can't differ fantasy and reality" or "the defendant explicitly knew the boundaries of reality and fantasy, and chose to act in the way they did"... but possessing such artwork is not against the law by itself.

Now, e6 is hosted in America, so it falls under America's laws. If anyone's laws differ, they can use their blacklist to avoid young content, and indeed the default blacklist for viewers not using an account contains young -rating:safe as a blacklisted line, IIRC. In the end, if you're breaking the law and viewing "pedophile" content in a country that abhors it, it's on you and not e6. So, do be careful when creating an account or searching as to not disable your blacklist, unless you're OK with the possible consequences.

TL;DR: real life children and photos of children in sexual situations is legally pedophilia. Drawings or otherwise clearly fantasy depictions are not. E6 already upholds it's end of the "deal" by following American law and providing a default blacklist, so it's not breaking any rules by having "Cub" artwork on site.

Alright then, i mean i use nordVPN when looking at e6 anyway so im probably fine, i would never condone or consume actual child pornography mostly because I don’t find humans attractive, let alone children, but sometimes people draw certain things really well ane it gets me horny so ye, I’ve been pretty on the fence on this for a while and i wanted to know if it seriously was actually ok to look at if it was something that turned me on, idk if im making any sense lol

I don’t consider myself a pedo in anyway, it’s just some artists i follow that make cub art do it too well and got me i to it but i wasn’t sure if i should, y’know?

It's legal and we do not have to deal with advertisement providers nor payment processers, where majority of problems with this kind of content actually stems from. Additionally we have a blacklisting system, so we aren't alienating people who do not want to see that content.

Just a reminder that Twitter and Inkbunny also allow pornography featuring underaged anthro characters and both of those are also located in US.
e621 is mostly site for congregating, so the content here usually originates elsewhere so these are generally the sources.

Technically, it's not pedophilia being discussed here but possession of pornographic material depicting a real life minor. As there's no real life minor being affected in this art, the US's First Amendment comes into play, protecting the freedom of expression from governmental interference. People may not approve of it, not like it, and can certainly regulate it within their own personal areas of control, it's not illegal to host clearly fictional pornography of a minor.

mairo said:
Just a reminder that Twitter and Inkbunny also allow pornography featuring underaged anthro characters and both of those are also located in US.
e621 is mostly site for congregating, so the content here usually originates elsewhere so these are generally the sources.

FWIW, Inkbunny is primarily hosted in Europe, though it is true that we have cache servers in the USA (including one graciously provided by e621's owner). We also have a policy against human (and essentially human) characters in sexual situations, which we consider relevant with regards to laws about depictions of children - including fictional children - that exist in Canada, the UK, Australia, etc.

This question has been raised so many times already (and will eventually be locked again soon), so I'm just gonna cite my response from a similar thread.
In short, cub art is not illegal and e6 will continue hosting it until it is.

Well then, this was a very civil discussion

fendenner said:
Well then, this was a very civil discussion

When a question gets asked enough, you eventually just sigh and begin auto-piloting it. Not much room for impoliteness when you're not even paying attention anymore.

I mean, a quick google search easily shows that in the U.S.A under some sort of federal law that was passed in like 2003 actually make all depictions of art/simulation ect ect that depicts ANYTHING underage engaging in sexual acts illegal and prosecutable, so im not sure why it's still allowed on e621

You mean the laws that have been repeatedly stated to be unconstitutional, with the only cases using them having actual abuse content mixed-in? The laws that clarify it must be "indistinguishable from actual child abuse"?

The only one I can think of where it was just underage comics the guy was charged because they were incest, not for the underaged part.
Technically, under the guidelines as my limited grasp of the english language would suggest, it's all forms of obscenity that are deemed to be devoid of artistic or political value, which is pretty broad and sweeping and would logically include pretty much all internet pornography beyond "tasteful" softcore content if it was actually followed to the word.

siral_exan said:
It mostly boils down to the legal definition of pedophilia and the common definition of pedophilia. In America, pedophilia (the crime) involves REAL children; most of the time, drawings of children is written off as fantasy and is not acted upon. This means you can have a clearly fake image of a child, such as Kanna from MKDR or Edward from the comic School Days by Krezz, and not have legal action performed on you. However, photography of children in sexual situations or committing the act itself is illegal.

In contrast, some people decide to just label any form of artwork featuring underaged characters in sexual situations as "pedophilia". They typically don't know that there's a difference between fantasy and reality, or might know that there's a difference but not care. Now, IIRC if you are caught possessing or performing pedophilia and are being tried in the court of law, the drawn artwork can be used against you for profiling, stuff like "my client can't differ fantasy and reality" or "the defendant explicitly knew the boundaries of reality and fantasy, and chose to act in the way they did"... but possessing such artwork is not against the law by itself.

Now, e6 is hosted in America, so it falls under America's laws. If anyone's laws differ, they can use their blacklist to avoid young content, and indeed the default blacklist for viewers not using an account contains young -rating:safe as a blacklisted line, IIRC. In the end, if you're breaking the law and viewing "pedophile" content in a country that abhors it, it's on you and not e6. So, do be careful when creating an account or searching as to not disable your blacklist, unless you're OK with the possible consequences.

TL;DR: real life children and photos of children in sexual situations is legally pedophilia. Drawings or otherwise clearly fantasy depictions are not. E6 already upholds it's end of the "deal" by following American law and providing a default blacklist, so it's not breaking any rules by having "Cub" artwork on site.

thank you for letting us know. I'm glad actually reasonable people make those laws, and not lunatics who treat cub porn and real child pornography(which involves a real child) as the same thing.
The people who can't see the difference sicken me, and they should see a doctor.

tabaluga said:
thank you for letting us know. I'm glad actually reasonable people make those laws, and not lunatics who treat cub porn and real child pornography(which involves a real child) as the same thing.
The people who can't see the difference sicken me, and they should see a doctor.

Why, why would you cast Create Undead on this thread of all threads?

votp said:
Why, why would you cast Create Undead on this thread of all threads?

Undead cub fetish?

There's also depictions of cannibalism, robbery, abuse, snuff, cub, bestiality and gore. So if you're talking about "the law" on such things, it doesn't really apply to fiction in any civilised country.
It's like saying shoot-em-up games makes someone a murderer. If someone has a fetish it doesn't mean they want to pursue it in real life.
Also, anthropomorphic cubs don't even exist in real life. They look more like plushies than children, is plushophilia pedophilia? Also many non-cub acclaimed furry femboys look often like they could be pre-teens (like a pederasty fetish) and that's probably porn a majority of furs already fap to. Yet it's just a style, and it's not suddenly "cub" just because it resembles toddlercon.

Not to mention, many loli/shota/toddler-like body shapes (e.g. chibi pokemon) aren't even regarded as "cub" by many folk I know of because they're clearly just small and cute and not underage. So is it suddenly magically wrong when an artist says it's supposed to be a kid in the artist's eyes even if not the viewer's? It makes no sense at all. Or should we ban geriatrics having sex if the artist randomly tags them as "underage". Or may be ban "littles" who look underage but identify as older? And if you base underageness based on "claim", then artists can just "not claim" it to be underage. How do you even police such a thing and what exactly "defines" a underage appearance? Because like said, cub isn't just like ages 0-10 but also 10-16. And let's not forget, ferals exist, and "anthros" can "borrow" from the more feral equivalent's aging. So if a semianthro is 6 months old it could be "mature" for that species, so then when an artist says its "6 months old" does it mean it's mature or not if you don't know if that's human or species-specific maturity rate? And we also know there's furries who are eunuchs or have small genitals so we can't just go on "sexual maturity" at a glance, either.

It's impossible to police and makes zero sense to, just use your blacklist if you don't like to see it. As it is it requires you to "login" to see cub, which tbh is very picky because bestiality by obscenity law is illegal in more places than drawn cub porn but I figure it's because most furries overall are more ok with bestiality than cub which is pretty one-sided in terms of overall global "moral concern".