Somehow this has to be addressed? · 4:27pm Jul 25th, 2021
Just wanted to post a quick reminder that whenever you see somebody post something such as:
"Hey by the way, the supreme court ruled that things like foalcon are protected under the 1st Amendment, so they can't ban it from the website!"
This is an immediate sign that this person has absolutely no idea what they are talking about. Fimfiction is a private website hosted by knighty, a man who by the way happens to live in fucking Britain. I don't particularly give a shit if foalcon gets banned or not, and I know it likely never will be, but holy hell I am so tired of people on a private website quoting the Supreme Court as if that has any impact on what knighty is allowed to do on a website that he owns and maintains.
This was a quick PSA that the United States Supreme Court does not rule over literally everything, and if you think it does, you're stupid lol.
That is some truth.
Honestly, I am glad to see the torrent of downvotes these foalcon stories get nowadays. That kind of content really grosses me out. Like, what the standard adult looks for in their partner... I'm sorry, but kids ain't got it.
5559931
The most important quality I look for in a potential partner is that they don't want to fuck kids :)
Pedophiles are disgusting. That is all.
5559932
That's up there for me, right next to nice curves.
5559934
Do these do anything for you, babycakes?
i.postimg.cc/bJyXq8wk/g6-curves-04.jpg
5559936
No, but this does:
media.tenor.com/images/b5d65dea4feb573cd42c490e1322f7f5/tenor.png
Well Article 10 of the ECHR is similar to the US's First Amendment: "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."
Even if you strongly disagree with it, people can still post it online. Doesn't mean it won't be downvoted though.
5559938
I never said people can't post it online, I said that as this is knighty's website, he has the right to ban specific content. Knighty is not public authority. He is the website owner.
5559931
But does that really warrant downvotes though? There’s plenty of kinks in stories on this site I find disgusting but I don’t go out of my way to downvote the person’s story and thus make others think it potentially looks of poor quality just from seeing the amount of red in the bar.
For example, I’m genuinely sickened by kinks such as farts, scat/piss, vore/cock vore, and a few others. I may not like them, but I know there’s others out there who do and this I won’t knock them for it. Just like I enjoy futa, mommy dom and male rimjobs in particular, and I also acknowledge that there’s plenty out there who don’t enjoy those and other kinks of mine. We all have our own interests when it comes to fics or clop, and it genuinely hurts no one. Personally I just brush past the stuff I don’t like and stick with what I do and I wish others would do the same, unless a story is genuinely bad and deserve ridicule.
5559943
Probably because they want to fuck kids
5559942
I understand your point for sure and I generally never downvote anything (I have like a 98% upvote/downvote ratio on this site). And generally, if something is gross or not my thing, I don't go out of my way to downvote. However, the downvote does ultimately represent any users ability to state they don't like someone's content. Now, I don't patrol the site for foalcon to downvote every waking second or anything. I prefer to actually look for stories I want to read, but it is nice seeing people express their distaste of something that is generally considered to be reprehensible.
5559947
The ECHR is actually the European Convention on Human Rights, but regardless, it's still a private website.
5559940
I absolutely agree, that doesn't mean that he is free to do whatever he likes without critique or backlash. Being an enforcing body without considering the thoughts of others would make them a dictator.
5559951
I absolutely agree with you, he would face immense backlash for removing foalcon. A large portion of the website's users would leave if he were to simply remove it. I actually am not a part of the "#banallfoalcon" group, because I just ignore stories I have no desire to read. However, I will just go ahead and give my thoughts on something.
I think using the term 'fetish' when discussing foalcon is treading down a rather dangerous path. Finding children or child-like creatures sexually attractive is not a fetish, it is clearly defined as a mental illness and should be treated as such. I find it insane that we live in a world where people will try to paint foalcon/pedophilia as just a fetish that "if you don't like it, don't read it!".
Oh yay
The Supreme Court argument
Why am I not surprised
pedos bad
5559942
Children aren’t fetishes and pedo-bait deserves ridicule. No one is going to force you to downvote them if you don’t want to but you shouldn’t be surprised that people are justified in doing so.
Yep, here's an American lawyer explaining what the First Amendment does and doesn't do. "Free speech" and the First Amendment are not the same thing:
5559957
Psych degree with actual clinical experience here. I'm not arguing over terminology but I thought you might appreciate diagnostic criteria, and in general I tire of seeing armchair psychologists diagnosing people incorrectly like this. I should note first that something not being a disorder doesn't mean it is ethical, acceptable, or even that it should be legal, much less that it should be allowed on a website.
Not all child sexual abusers have pedophilic disorder. As with rapists, the motivation to abuse often has little to do with sex. Contrariwise, most people diagnosed with pedophilic disorder are not child sex abusers, though many are still offenders who have accessed child sexual exploitative material. Additionally, pedophilic disorder only applies if an attraction to real-life children is a person's primary attraction: it is not considered a disorder under the DSM-V if a person is preferentially attracted to adults, or if they are only attracted to things in fantasy and are not aroused by real children, even if they have molested children. Additionally, nothing is considered a disorder unless it is seen in a clinical setting. Even if a person is attracted to real children as their primary attraction, if it causes them no stress and leads to no impairment in social or occupational functioning (such as doing something illegal, causing other disorders like major depression, etc.), then it isn't a mental disorder because it would never present as a diagnosable condition.
In general, the APA does not label things "disorders" to mean "these people are the ones with a problem that needs to be fixed". That isn't the purpose of clinical diagnosis. Plenty of people with disorders are ethical and safe to be around, and plenty of people without disorders are dangerous assholes. Don't lean on APA definitions to argue ethics because that is dumb.
5559989
I completely agree, fetishization of children is abhorrent and I disdain normalization of it. At the same time though, this is just fictional writing about horses. Taboo for certain, but doesn’t really harm anyone. After all there’s all manner of stories here featuring rape and darker things like torture and murder and I doubt any of them would wis to act on such depictions irl as opposed to in writing.
5559988
I guess I didn’t word it correctly. I can understand downvotes in that case. I personally abstain from it but I can see why others do. Pedophilia is indeed disgusting and I detest it as a concept that I can even comprehend.
Stating that there will be backlash if pedo content is banned is like saying a bar will lose nazi customers if swastikas are banned.
It’s a no-brainer.
The question is - is Knighty happy with the reputation of allowing pedo content, for the sake of Subscribe Star income?
At some point, the bartender needs to say - “No more fucking nazis.”
Or in Knighty’s case - “No more fucking pedos.”
EDIT:
Or Knighty could just say nothing.
And we end up with a “nazi bar” as others have eloquently put it, with backlash of a different sort.
Either way, people will leave.
It’s a question of what type of crowd remains. Yay pedos.
I'm hungry
5560250
💩
5560014
Kinda an odd response when your previous comment was that you didn't seem to understand the difference between the content you might simply dislike vs. content that (at the very least) jeopardizes the social climate of the website by letting people with predatory desires sink their heels in. But if it was really just a matter of wording, then that's probably resolved itself.
5560260
I’m not too good at clarifying my thoughts or putting them into coherent words, especially online. I can now see clearly that, while I don’t exercise it myself, people can downvote anything for any reason they well please and there’s nothing wrong with that. Though when it escalated to hatred and harassment, that’s what I find uncalled for. Civil discussion, like this taking place here, is so much more positive and helpful than yelling.
Just want to say I’m not insinuating that you are yelling or being uncivil, just that in cases where people aren’t, it would be much better for all parties if they were.
5560008
You actually know what you're talking about and we can't have THAT on the Internet.
5560565
I'm positively stunned that I've only received one downhoof this time.
Fair