/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

[Anonymous No.3799625]

I am person who genuinely believes that an artist should be able to create whatever type of content they wish and share it with an audience that has an interest in it. Uncensored and without restrictions.

My argument is that it's fie as long as it's fiction. There is no one being taken advantaged of or harmed. Sure some content may be downright abhorrent. But it has all right to be.

Many people hold the opinion that there should be a line. Banning certain content that deal with children, political figures and extreme violence.

Debate.

[Anonymous No.3799632]

>>3799625
if an artist starts drawing ultra realistic CP, it will just feed into the idea that its something good when its not, it will attract pedophiles and increase a link between sex and kids. I dont agree with letting an artist create and share this kind of art.

[Anonymous No.3799638]

>>3799632
Ipso facto an artist shouldn't draw depictions of violence because it creates links between violence and appeal, so artists shouldn't be allowed to depict scenes of violence.
Don't play violent vidya anon otherwise the cops should be bashing down your door.

[Anonymous No.3799642]

>>3799632
People know the law. People are aware of the fact that it is illegal to have sexual relationships with minors. People are aware of the fact that it illegal to murder and steal.

People who play call of duty (or literally any fps)don't go on shooting sprees because "it will just feed into the idea that its something good".

[Anonymous No.3799650]

>>3799642
>everyone is a free minded libertarian thinker and in no way shape or form can be influenced by the things they masturbate to, also video games is the same as masturbating btw.

[Anonymous No.3799656]

>>3799650
so this is what its like to have no sense of logic huh

[Anonymous No.3799657]

>>3799632
>if an artist starts drawing ultra realistic CP, it will just feed into the idea that its something good when its not, it will attract pedophiles and increase a link between sex and kids.

[Anonymous No.3799660]

OP here. This is a serious debate so please keep the name-calling to a minimum. I want to hear Many opinions and arguments.

[Anonymous No.3799664]

>>3799656
What logic are you getting from that psychology of sexual fetishes is the same as stimulating your brain by playing video games? I'm curious how you and all other pedo defenders can come at people saying people's psyche are so easy to understand and you can easily correlate 2 totally different scenarios and call them the same?

[Anonymous No.3799681]

>>3799650
Prove your point. The research into vidya has already proven no increase in violence, and if masturbation is so much more powerful as you claim, then it should be easy to find studies that prove porn will radicalize into sexual abuse.
Naturally, the stats for adults prove you wrong. Boys are losing virginity later and later, often never, and sexual abuse is not on the rise in the west, despite the hyper prevalence of porn, porn which, by your logic, should be encouraging men to fuck at all costs.
I hate pedos but arbitrary restriction of art is tyrannical and must be destroyed.

[Anonymous No.3799685]

I claim that fantasy/fiction can even provide cathartic feelings and in fact deter people from acting out violent or sexually inappropriate behaviour.

[Anonymous No.3799689]

>>3799685
Agreed. Only psychopaths use media as an excuse for their psychopathy.

[Anonymous No.3799695]

>>3799638
depictions of child abuse and depiction of violence between adults with formulated views and beliefs are entirely different things
the average person can emphasise with being physically harmed, and are deterred, but they cannot emphasise with being young and being sexually abused, giving them the potential to develop warped and incorrect views of the situation

>>3799685
People become desensitised to any stimulus after long enough
you can DELAY someone's violent or sexually inappropriate nature with fiction, but soon enough they'll want to try the real thing instead
people in possession of fictitious material should be charged guilty of the crimes they depict before they have the chance to commit them; they can't be saved

[Anonymous No.3799701]

>>3799695

Okay, so depiction of child abuse is the problem. What if the art just shows a kid masturbating without any adults involved? All good then?

[Anonymous No.3799703]

>>3799695
>people in possession of fictitious material should be charged guilty of the crimes they depict before they have the chance to commit them; they can't be saved
Thought crimes, no. You sound like an insane autist who has no bearing in reality to begin with. Either that or youre trolling.

[Anonymous No.3799706]

>>3799695
>people in possession of fictitious material should be charged guilty of the crimes they depict before they have the chance to commit them
I was taking you seriously until you started spouting this monkey babble

By this logic all gamers should be arrested for murder. Along with 90% of authors.

[Anonymous No.3799711]

>>3799695
>depictions of child abuse and depiction of violence between adults with formulated views and beliefs are entirely different things
what are legal lolis
>the average person can emphasise with being physically harmed, and are deterred, but they cannot emphasise with being young and being sexually abused, giving them the potential to develop warped and incorrect views of the situation
actually, most pedos were victims themselves at some point
>you can DELAY someone's violent or sexually inappropriate nature with fiction, but soon enough they'll want to try the real thing instead
Unless they're planning a rape or literally grooming a child, they aren't guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. You can't prosecute them.
>people in possession of fictitious material should be charged guilty of the crimes they depict before they have the chance to commit them; they can't be saved
no?

[Anonymous No.3799717]

>>3799695
What about shows like Big Mouth? Where the entire premise is about kids - actual middle schoolers - learning about sex and exploring themselves? The show is shit but that’s besides the point. Does it get a free pass because it’s funny to some people and it’s a “safe” depiction of sexual minors that aims to educate rather than feed into an adult’s sexual fantasy?

[Anonymous No.3799729]

>>3799695
>>3799717
And trust me friend, thought policing is fucking retarded. Actions that affect other human beings or the physical self are all that matter when it comes to law, and it should stay that way.

[Anonymous No.3799730]

>>3799632
only a latent pedophile would believe this

[Anonymous No.3799752]

>>3799730
FBI come quick, we found a pedo for you

[Anonymous No.3799760]

>>3799701
>What if the art just shows a kid masturbating without any adults involved? All good then?
The artist normally takes the role of a secondary abuser by depicting the primary abuser and abused, but in this case they would take the role of primary abuser. Not good. Even the threat to public decency such an image presents should be reason enough.
>>3799703
>>3799729
You cannot argue that a world without thought criminals would not be a more just and moral world. Without performing mental gymnastics on the definition of morality, that is; mind you, they don't normally make exceptions for ""certain types"" of child abuse...
>>3799706
>By this logic all gamers should be arrested for murder.
Killing in war is legal, and the most popular games are war sims; their players aren't criminals.
Other depictions are unlawful, but their players are effectively "delayed" from commiting their crimes by the massive amount of games available - but they create as many criminals as they delay.
Keep in mind the generations that have been most exposed to videogames are barely halfway through their lives; plenty of time for the switch to flick.
>>3799717
>Does [show about kids - actual middle schoolers - learning about sex and exploring themselves] get a free pass because it’s funny to some people and it’s a “safe” depiction of sexual minors that aims to educate rather than feed into an adult’s sexual fantasy?
No, kids can do that in their own time. Adults can remember doing it, "find it funny", and move on.
Your "safe" depictions of child abuse don't get an "educational purposes" pass either. Knowledge corrupts.

[Anonymous No.3799920]

>>3799632
>pictures make people do bad things

[Anonymous No.3799922]

>>3799664
>saying people's psyche are so easy to understand and you can easily correlate 2 totally different scenarios and call them the same?
You are the one making statements like this, cunt.

[Anonymous No.3799927]

>>3799632
If you legitimately believe this you either have a superiority complex by being able to know exactly what everyone will take away from something or you are incredibly easily swayed by content and think everyone else is too

[Anonymous No.3799930]

>>3799922
>no u

[Anonymous No.3799937]

>>3799760
>You cannot argue that a world without thought criminals would not be a more just and moral world. Without performing mental gymnastics on the definition of morality, that is; mind you, they don't normally make exceptions for ""certain types"" of child abuse...

150% of the population would be thought criminals if that were a thing. you dont make any good points on "morality" as it is subjective in each culture and society. what you propose is a sterile world filled with nothing, no imagination, no excitement, no humanity. the universe is hostile, we created morality and each person has a subjective view on morality that will never fit 100% with your subjective view of morality. there is no possible way to achieve the hypothetical situation you put forth. and if such a thing were possible, there definitely wouldnt be a 4chan. there would be no naked art, there would be no anime waifus for you weebz, there would be no controversial subject matter to expound upon to create intriguing works of art. you have an extreme argument of violence and sexual abuse, but violence and sexual abuse are very normal in nature. would you propose that we try to stop all the violence and sexual abuse that animals exhibit as well, because according to your though process, just witnessing or knowing about how animals could do such things would cause humans to do those things as well.

>but their players are effectively "delayed" from commiting their crimes by the massive amount of games available - but they create as many criminals as they delay.
that is statistically false, and has been tried by the supreme court numerous times with the outcome being that violence or deviant behavior in media do not cause people to do those things in real life, in such a capacity that you claim. our structured society has implemented a teaching system to try an minimize those types of things as much as possible and we live in the least violent times ever documented in history.

[Anonymous No.3799942]

>>3799760
>The artist normally takes the role of a secondary abuser by depicting the primary abuser and abused, but in this case they would take the role of primary abuser. Not good. Even the threat to public decency such an image presents should be reason enough.


The illustration is of a fictional child masturbating in solitude. There is no abuse implied, no more than you are having abusive fantasies by thinking of a naked body in your mind's eye.

[Anonymous No.3799945]

>>3799625
So what you’re saying is that you get off to seeing children fucked by adults and you’re a pedophile? Wow repulsive.

[Anonymous No.3799961]

>>3799920
>he thinks the content people consume has no impact on them whatsoever

[Anonymous No.3799969]

>>3799930
>claims that consumed media may dictate one's actions in real life and even suppress the knowledge of laws of consequences if said laws are broken
>claims opponent is too dumb to understand MUH SYCOLOGIES while lacking the most casual surface knowledge of it
>ignores facts
>refuses to provide evidence
>every single argument is built on some fallacy
You are retarded.

>>3799961
>content people consume affects them in some way thus my assumptions about how it affects them are true

[Anonymous No.3799977]

This thread was moved to >>>/trash/21144562