Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13

Thread: AB/DL Art, and Internet Safety

  1. #1

    Post AB/DL Art, and Internet Safety

    Hello Forum,

    I've been a relatively active artist in this community for a while now, and I've been moderately selective about who I accept work from.

    However, I really feel quite clueless when it comes down to it, and it concerns me.

    I would like this thread to generate modest and mature discussion regarding AB/DL art. I am aware this thread has been discussed before, but I did not feel that thread really answered any questions. I would like this thread to do that, if possible, specifically so that the information in this thread can be referenced later or directed to the Wiki.

    I would like to address two questions:

    1) What, exactly, can make AB/DL art pornographic or illegal? On a side note, if it is pornographic, why have none of the artists been arrested?

    2) Even if this art is not pornographic in nature, is it legal for a minor to request and receive such art?


    I welcome any discussion that can be provided, but I would please request that it be kept mature and honest. I am sure there are a lot of artists on this forum who will want to learn about what we will be discussing in this thread.

    Anyway, I thank you for your contributions. I have to go, but I'll post more in the next few hours.

  2. #2

    Default

    Alright well to answer your questions...

    1) What, exactly, can make AB/DL art pornographic or illegal? On a side note, if it is pornographic, why have none of the artists been arrested?
    Pornography - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Pornography or porn is the portrayal of explicit sexual subject matter for the purposes of sexual excitement and erotic satisfaction.

    There ya go. In other words If someone is naked in a picture it's not porn. But if said person proceeds to rub themselves then it's porn. Pretty simple really.

    2) Even if this art is not pornographic in nature, is it legal for a minor to request and receive such art?
    Nope I don't see why diaper art would be considered illegal.

  3. #3
    GaashaHuzzah

    Default

    1) If someone gets their rocks off to it, it's porn. But, this is rather flawed since Rule 34 would mean that every piece of art is porn in some way or another. Alternatively, it's porn if it was created to stir up a tingle in your loins. If it wasn't, it's not porn.

    2) See the second sentence of number one. If it wasn't made to be porn, there's nothing at all wrong with it.

    Hope that helps

  4. #4

    Default

    DISCLAIMERS: I am not a lawyer, and this should not be construed as legal advice in any jurisdiction. Also, since you haven't indicated your country of residence, I'll assume you are in the US.

    To address question 1, if the art depicts minors engaged in sexual activity, then it is pornography. However, as long as you don't have naked subjects or sexual contact.

    For question 2, it probably is not legal for you to provide such material to minors, as it could be considered sexual in nature.

  5. #5

  6. #6

    Default

    Uhhh...Make sure to follow the US internet obscenity laws if you upload anything to a site hosted in the United States. Nothing that *looks* like it could be too young (safer to not mention age of the character). Make sure to have a defense ready if someone says you're drawing pedophile art.

  7. #7

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by dcviper View Post
    For question 2, it probably is not legal for you to provide such material to minors, as it could be considered sexual in nature.
    I asked AngelaBauer about this, and she basically shared the same opinion: though not sexual, the context of the art's origin (a.k.a., an AB/DL site) might lend its self to being sexually arousing even if the original intent of the artist was not to arouse the audience.

    I, by no means, do not intend to arouse the audience when I make my characters. I intend to grow myself artistically and to express my feelings therapeutically--like most artists I know. However, the drawings I make may be arousing to some members or casual Internet browsers (who I do not intend to view my work) because the work is very unique to the AB/DL community.

    It definitely brings up a contradiction: there are many artists out there who make art with or without the intention to arouse the audience. There are obvious examples, and examples which were not meant to be arousing. If you go to art websites, such as DeviantArt, it is very common to see paintings and digital portraits of nude figures, revealing comic characters, and even photographs.

    So, what jurisdiction actually exists? Maybe it is the context in which the art is posted that matters most?

    As far as making art for others goes, I do not plan to make art for anyone under the age of consent (which, within the USA, is eighteen years in most places) until I have a clear idea of what is legal and what is not. Heck, I am not sure if I should even post anything in the art gallery because of the potential for it to be erotic to some members--even if my intention was clearly not sexual in nature.

    However, that is how I plan to deal with it. For those of you who have already been dealing with commissions, how have you dealt with it? Do you also choose to not accept requests from younger members? Even so, how can you verify the true age of the person who has contacted you?

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Hinkie: "My rule of thumb is 'if you have to ask, don't do it'"

    What if somebody doesn't think to ask? They would still be held responsible if they did something wrong.
    I am asking specifically so that the forum can be informed about these things and make responsible decisions.


    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    This is quoted from legalzoom.com, and I think it might contribute to the discussion as well.

    What is Obscenity?

    Legally, obscenity refers to words, images or actions that offend the sexual morality of its viewers. This could range from simple profanity to offensive pictures or videos. Under the U.S. law, the Supreme Court has found that, when used in the context of the First Amendment and free speech, obscenity must refer to materials that are of a sexual nature.

    The Miller Test

    For something to be considered "obscene," the Supreme Court uses what is known as "The Miller Test." Developed in 1973 in the case Miller v. California, the Supreme Court determined that the following types of works are not protected by the First Amendment and, therefore, can be prohibited. If the average person finds that when viewed as a whole, a work:

    * Appeals to the "prurient" interest (i.e., an unhealthy and degrading interest in sex)
    * Depicts or describes sexual conduct in a patently offensive way, and
    * Lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

    All three parts of the Miller Test must be met before a material can be found to be obscene under the law. If just one of the parts is not met, the material would not be considered obscene under law and, in turn, would be constitutionally protected under the First Amendment. The most controversial portion of the test is the question of creative or scientific value. Even though some pornography may appeal to an average person's prurient interest and depict sexual conduct in an offensive way, if some contend it holds an artistic or literary value, it fails the Miller Test and is not deemed obscene.

    The Internet


    The Internet has made the law of obscenity much more convoluted. Federal obscenity laws apply to interstate and foreign issues, such as distribution; intrastate issues are mostly governed by state law. Today, materials considered "obscene" can be sent from a computer in California to someone across the U.S. as fast as a click of a button. The question is: What state governs the issue of obscenity when the Internet can reach multiple areas? Interestingly, the Miller Test is based on what is offensive in a certain "community," not the United States as a whole. For example, what's offensive to someone from New York City may differ from what offends a person in Topeka, Kansas. But, the Miller Test's basis of "community" becomes blurred with the advent of the Internet; a state can define a community as the state as a whole, a county, a city or another geographic area. The geographic area of the Internet, however, is nonexistent, and geographic boundaries are essential to the "community" definition for the Supreme Court's Miller Test.

    As technology redefines our communities and our world, the Internet will more than likely be the source of more obscenity trials landing in front of the Supreme Court. Many believe the Court may have to challenge the current state of the Miller Test as it relates to electronic obscenity. What will happen in the future? Like Justice Potter Stuart famously said about pornography decades ago, "I'll know it when I see it."



    I, and any other furry or AB/DL artists, might easily argue that the work serves artistic purpose. I would also think that it can be argued whether or not the interests are "prurient". Lastly, I would think that unless the work specifically appears to be sexualized (a.k.a., jacking off to diapers or exposed genitalia, for example), it would not fit the second description. Look at furry jade fox, for example. There is clearly no sexual behavior depicted in his work.
    Last edited by Kif; 13-Jul-2010 at 23:50. Reason: did not want to double post; just added on to existing post.

  8. #8

    Default

    It all depends on where you are. Any drawing of a naked child in Canada inhabits a legal grey area, meaning it's legal to possess but illegal to sell, I believe.

  9. #9
    Spearmint

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by GaashaHuzzah View Post
    1) If someone gets their rocks off to it, it's porn. But, this is rather flawed since Rule 34 would mean that every piece of art is porn in some way or another. Alternatively, it's porn if it was created to stir up a tingle in your loins. If it wasn't, it's not porn.

    2) See the second sentence of number one. If it wasn't made to be porn, there's nothing at all wrong with it.

    Hope that helps
    Pretty much summed up my thoughts.

  10. #10

    Default

    I've asked another artist how he handles this kind of work.

    He mentioned that when he receives requests from minors, he makes the drawings appear less babyish and makes sure the figures are fully clothed.

    I think this is a good suggestion.

    So, maybe I am being a bit paranoid?
    I have been under some emotional stress, lately...

    After all, it is very obvious that my art is innocent in nature and serves to address real aspects of my perceived childhood and current life--especially moments of joy, love, and innocence. My motivation for producing work is to reinforce my own identity in a new and positive light, in order to compensate for any perceived loss. Any existence of arousal in my audience is coincidental; diapers are sexual objects for many members of the AB/DL community, as are feet sexual objects for foot fetishists. Even if I were to post my work on another web site, there would still exist an audience aroused by some aspect of my work.

    Does anybody agree?
    Last edited by Kif; 14-Jul-2010 at 07:35.

Similar Threads

  1. So, ... about gun safety
    By Khaymen in forum Off-topic
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 30-Jan-2010, 21:06
  2. Has paranoia over safety gone too far in schools?
    By NoahKokoro in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: 30-Oct-2009, 04:39
  3. Important safety message.
    By Valentine in forum Mature Topics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 02-Sep-2008, 11:12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
ADISC.org - the Adult Baby / Diaper Lover / Incontinence Support Community.
ADISC.org is designed to be viewed in Firefox, with a resolution of at least 1280 x 1024.