Dream FA feedback

Hi, long time FA’r (2005 woo) and fandom person here. Thank you for taking feedback on the new changes. I have to say, it was quite disarming to hear these changes were being made and no feedback would be taken (at first? Or that was my impression). I am glad to know you are taking feedback, to hopefully refine the changes and make sure the goal is achieved.

I do not like this change. It makes me feel like certain groups are being targeted, and does not show a clear motivation to improve the website/community. The changes, from my outside perspective, come across as generalized and unspecific. I believe this opens them to be used as weapons to target individuals rather than to cause positive change in FurAffinity. I would compare these to ‘loitering laws’, which have historically been used to target individuals of groups (and specifically ignored regarding other groups). Policies that have vagueness or are subjective and up to (mods, other users, anyone really) are inherently applied unequally and with bias. The human brain is just blatantly bad at doing this.

It affects me due to: writing fiction involving characters of different sizes and proportions, in which I am clear that they have the mentality, reasoning, and maturity of adults. They simply have different body proportions, which I believe is part of the appeal of the fandom; exploring beyond 1:1 human shapes and sizes, be it werewolves with monstrous limbs, an egg with legs and ghost arms (yes, really, Digitamamon), a long noodle dragon or a raichu. Exploring outside the human shape has helped with body dysmorphia; I cannot emphasize this more than the diversity of shapes and sizes found in VR Chat, and how ‘right’ people feel in these different morphologies. Additionally, I am far more concerned for my peers who draw Rule34 art and use canon proportions, who draw significant income from these fandoms (mind, this is not me, nor my relations). Additionally, there are those who have styles or naturally draw in a way others could target due to proportions.

The parts that I agree with are that blatant depictions of minors in sexual situations should not be allowed on FA. However, the parts that I disagree with are labeling age exclusively by size/shape or ‘how many heads tall’, using a ‘development of humans’ chart. Some furries match human morphology, but many do not, and many of the different monsters/creatures/etc that never in their lifetime match human morphology. I also disagree with the ‘minors shown in fetish situations’ as being okay in this rule. This comes across as a ‘X person in power likes it, so it’s okay’. Adult art of minors is not allowed on FA, and fetish art of minors should not be allowed on FA. (To those who say ‘everything is a fetish’, okay. Find a way to draw hard boundaries. In my opinion, vore and pregnancy are ‘fetish’ material. If boundaries are drawn, it should not be left to the mods. ‘I know it when I see it’, should not be in the power of a few).

The things that are unclear to me or I would like more clarification on are why this rule was chosen to be altered/implemented at this point. What was the stimulus/impetus? Is there a major issue behind the scenes/with minor art at the moment? What is the goal of this rule change/change in policy enforcement? This has not been made clear, and for something that will affect users so drastically, I think this is one of the most important parts.

Here are the other issues and concerns I have with the policy update: I want to re-emphasize the fear that these rules are too vague and will be used, implemented, and harm in a biased manner. Furry is beautiful for its diversity and its exploration beyond ‘being human’. I would love to see that attitude embraced, and focus on ‘what can we include’, rather than ‘what can we ostracize’.

Here are the ways that I think these issues could be resolved:
1.	Roll back or cancel the policy change. Implementation of the policy, as is, at this point, is premature at best; and malicious negligence at worst.
2.	Generate a new policy with the input of FA users, with clear language, and concrete guidelines. Bias and subjective rulings cannot be a part of a policy that will so profoundly affect the user experience, community inclusion, and most importantly livelihood of many users.
a.	Perhaps include language use in this, as has been pointed out by several others in feedback. Just because someone hates an artist/their art doesn’t mean they can call it CP (CSAM, more appropriately, from what I understand?). That accusation can have enormous impact on a person’s life, personally, professionally, etc; and allowing that because a user doesn’t like kobolds or Chip and Dale is dangerous. While I fully support reporting these cases and being resolved and removed, those going around spamming it are doing harm to others.
3.	Please take the time to be specific and use examples when stating policies, reactions, etc. (Outdated example, thank you for deleting it:) a response was recently posted saying ‘furries =/= LGBT, stop it’ with ‘only because it’s been reported’… did the reporter link an example? Is this something that actually occurred? As the enforcer and policy maker, it is the administrator’s duty to ensure they are dealing with truth. You hold the power; you hold that responsibility. As a scientist, nothing bugs me more than ‘scientists agree that…’ ‘4/5 doctors…’
4.	I think this must be addressed on a case-by-case basis. A blanket ban on size/shape/etc does not address what seems to be the focus of this change. If there are users trying to include sexualize/fetishized pictures of minorities, address them directly and remove repeat offenders. How to determine this would need its own policies and user input, I think.
5.	I support making FA an 18+ website; much like many conventions now have an ‘adult dealer’s den’ or the Circa 21+ Casino in Las Vegas. Adults need a safe space to be adults; FA does seem to be a leader in that realm. (On the other side, I joined the fandom <18, and know the importance of a safe space to explore/learn furry for minors; but is FA the right place for that?).


More than anything- I understand these are a huge ask that will take time and energy. And I am sorry that you have to do it. But when you are affecting so many, and when you are affecting wellbeing of members, it is negligent to do less. I am very thankful for your read, time, and to considering what I’ve shared. Please, please remember- These decisions are affecting the livelihood of so many members of FA; their literal ability to earn money for food and shelter. Please let us have good faith and work to include and love each other, and no exclude and fear one another.