Actually, by the definition of porn I'm using, it is, in fact, a waste.
My definition of porn includes "instant gratification;" once you're done with it, you're done with it. It's essentially disposable, after that. If you're halfway through the story/movie/whatever you don't finish the story/movie/whatever to see how it turns out. Maybe you feel a bit disappointed, but that's about it. Once the user is gratified, the porn becomes essentially disposable.
Getting back on subject, this is why Omaha the Cat Dancer is not porn. There is a story that you are supposed to finish; if at any point, for any reason, you put the comic aside without finishing it and without intent to finish it, the story fails.
I'm not anti-porn; it is not harmful in and of itself, and must be judged on its own merits, which are different from the merits of art. However, I do not believe porn merits the same protection as art; incest, bestiality, and yes, pedophilia, are perfectly acceptable subjects for art, but not porn.
I come from the perspective of a fan of horror and superhero comic books; both have been labeled "pornographic." In the case of recent horror movies labeled "torture porn," the directors in question refused to label there movies as such. Horror is a very exploitative genre, and that is a very exploitative label; for the directors in question to adamently refuse the label, even ironically, goes a long way to prove these director's artistic integrity, and therefore the need to protect their work.
And that's the thing; my argument against cub porn has a very easy out. All anyone would have to do to get me on their side would simply relabel cub porn cub "art," which is something nobody has done! The creators themselves don't just aquiesce to the label; they use it themselves, unironically!
The problem with cub porn is a big problem in and of itself, but it points to a bigger problem in the furry fandom; a failure to know the difference between art and porn, or, put another way, that which deserves protection, without question, and that which deserves protection, with question.
Oh, and at Mister Twister; congratulations on finding Flayrah while avoiding fchan, FurAffinity, SoFurry, InkBunny, YiffStar, Ychan, the VCL and half-a-hundred other furry sites for your entire life. Seriously, you were unaware of the existence of The Lion King porn?
Actually, by the definition of porn I'm using, it is, in fact, a waste.
My definition of porn includes "instant gratification;" once you're done with it, you're done with it. It's essentially disposable, after that. If you're halfway through the story/movie/whatever you don't finish the story/movie/whatever to see how it turns out. Maybe you feel a bit disappointed, but that's about it. Once the user is gratified, the porn becomes essentially disposable.
Getting back on subject, this is why Omaha the Cat Dancer is not porn. There is a story that you are supposed to finish; if at any point, for any reason, you put the comic aside without finishing it and without intent to finish it, the story fails.
I'm not anti-porn; it is not harmful in and of itself, and must be judged on its own merits, which are different from the merits of art. However, I do not believe porn merits the same protection as art; incest, bestiality, and yes, pedophilia, are perfectly acceptable subjects for art, but not porn.
I come from the perspective of a fan of horror and superhero comic books; both have been labeled "pornographic." In the case of recent horror movies labeled "torture porn," the directors in question refused to label there movies as such. Horror is a very exploitative genre, and that is a very exploitative label; for the directors in question to adamently refuse the label, even ironically, goes a long way to prove these director's artistic integrity, and therefore the need to protect their work.
And that's the thing; my argument against cub porn has a very easy out. All anyone would have to do to get me on their side would simply relabel cub porn cub "art," which is something nobody has done! The creators themselves don't just aquiesce to the label; they use it themselves, unironically!
The problem with cub porn is a big problem in and of itself, but it points to a bigger problem in the furry fandom; a failure to know the difference between art and porn, or, put another way, that which deserves protection, without question, and that which deserves protection, with question.
Oh, and at Mister Twister; congratulations on finding Flayrah while avoiding fchan, FurAffinity, SoFurry, InkBunny, YiffStar, Ychan, the VCL and half-a-hundred other furry sites for your entire life. Seriously, you were unaware of the existence of The Lion King porn?
Fess up.