Babyfur artists are getting banned en masse from FurAffinity, the largest furry art website on the internet. Nobody seems to know why or who’s responsible. I think this is concerning.
What a babyfur is
For the uninitiated, babyfur is a genre of furry art that either depicts characters as babies or young children, or depicts adults who are adult baby diaper lovers (ABDLs).
There is nothing inherently sexual or inappropriate about babyfur art. There are two different camps in the community: SFW artists whose characters are minors, and NSFW and borderline-NSFW artists whose characters are adults who engage in ageplay or costume play. As long as the two don’t overlap, there’s not anything morally objectionable about it. It’s even allowed under FurAffinity’s rules! FurAffinity’s Upload Policy 2.7 reads:
2.7 Content Involving Minors Content featuring minors is not allowed when the minor is in the presence of sexual activity, sexual objects, or nudity, though exceptions may be made for non-sexual depictions of birth and breastfeeding. Presence is defined as being in the same scene, such as sharing a comic panel, contiguous image, reference sheet, or specific section of a story where characters are engaging each other. Minors may not have detailed bulges or outlines of normal or hyper genitalia, clothed or otherwise. Minors may not be fetishized. Minors may not be depicted as pregnant. Minors are defined as real or fictional humanoids with a childlike body or younger than 18 years old, and any adolescent animals or fantasy creatures. Upload Policy — Fur Affinity [dot] net
Why you should care
SFW artists and artists who work depicts adults only are getting caught up in the wake of these bans. They aren’t breaking the rules, so why the bans?
I agree that FurAffinity shouldn’t allow NSFW art featuring children.
By FurAffinity’s own rules, art of children that’s safe and age-appropriate shouldn’t be banned.
By FurAffinity’s own rules, art of consenting adults engaged in adult activity shouldn’t be banned.
Strange things are being done to FurAffinity’s users, and we have no idea why. We don’t know when or if the content restrictions will stop. Will other genres of art be banned later? And we certainly don’t know if FurAffinity will restore the accounts of artists wrongfully banned, or how and if they plan to rebuild trust.
The current site lead, Sciggles, is recovering from personal health issues—so, meanwhile, who’s in charge? Is anyone? How do we even find out?
You saved FurAffinity. You raised over $200,000 to do it. I wrote previously about my misgivings with the lack of transparency or accountability FurAffinity was showing.Things haven’t gotten clearer or more responsive in the last month. You deserve answers. Ash Coyote put it well: “The platform owes it to the people who helped save it to be open about its direction.” Then you can decide for yourself whether you want to continue to put your money, time, and effort into it.
Today, Patreon Trust and Safety sent me this response. Four times. They sent me the exact form letter to each of my queries.
Hi there,
This is [NAME REDACTED—Buddy] from Patreon’s Trust & Safety Team. Thanks so much for reaching out with input about our recent Community Guidelines refresh.
I’ve passed along your thoughts on how we present the subject of feederism within the Community Guidelines to Patreon’s Policy Team, who oversee the guidelines, and appreciate hearing from creators and members like you.
Our goal is to always provide clear and informed guidance on what is and is not allowed on Patreon; however, sometimes we need to continue clarifying specific nuances within a policy. We’ll reflect on what you shared as we continue to improve our policies. If you’re interested in hearing more about ongoing updates to Patreon’s content policies, stay tuned for the next update from the Creator Policy Engagement Program.
If you have any further questions, please don’t hesitate to reach out. Warm regards,
Patreon Trust & Safety
It’s the kind of message I would have written when I was in a public-facing position: “Wheels are turning, but I have no idea what direction they’re going, no control, and I haven’t been authorized to say anything further.” It’s noncommittal and only acts as an acknowledgement that they received my messages.
I’ll keep on this, and provide updates as I get them. Have the new Community Guidelines affected you or creators you support? Write me a comment and let me know!
On March 12, 2024, Patreon announced new Community Guidelines which prohibited works “promoting, normalizing, providing instructional advice about, coordinating, or otherwise glorifying disordered eating, feederism, or related topics.” They claim that these “pose risk to the physical, mental, or emotional health of those on the platform.” This apparently justifies banning them entirely.
Is this censorship? Yes. Is it legal? Also yes. There is another word for this, though, and that is bullshit.
Feederism? What’s that? Why does Patreon care?
If you don’t know, feederism is one of a group of interrelated kinks that involve gratification from food in some way. Some people like the feeling of being full, some enjoy gaining weight. There can be an element of power exchange. Sometimes it’s just nice to have someone show how they feel about you by taking care of you and sharing with you. Like with other abstract kinks, feederism can have a sexual component or not.
Feederism, like any kink, should be risk-aware and consensual, but when it is, it can enhance the lives of those involved.
You tell ‘em, Jack Black in School of Rock.
Yeah, it deals with concepts that society finds squicky. People are complicated and varied. It takes maturity to engage with this loaded a topic.
Late last year, Patreon banned adult baby diaper lover or ADBL-related content. The crinkles don’t hurt anybody. They just make potential investors squirm. Now, as then, Patreon wants to disappear a nuanced and difficult topic.
But wait, there’s more!
The guidelines as written ban way more content than Patreon potentially realizes. “Glorifying” disordered eating or feederism is bannable. Does that mean any positive depiction of a fat person enjoying food is verboten? According to the Community Guidelines, maybe. Bad-faith actors might report a work, and the creator could lose their Patreon for it.
By Cancer Research UK – Original email from CRUK, CC BY-SA 4.0, Link
A nasogastric tube is a medical device which helps folks who can’t swallow get food into their system. There’s nothing remotely controversial about that. It’s technically banned. Patreon got uncomfortable with cartoon foxes sucking on helium tanks to inflate themselves big and round. Should that mean that people with medical difficulties can’t show their faces anymore?
Patreon needs to answer for this.
Banning content involving feederism or anything that looks like it is too broad a stroke. I think that’s unfair, to say the least. To make a point, I submitted the following questions to Patreon Community Support. I’ll report their responses.
Clarification on “health risk” language in Patreon Community Guidelines
“Patreon prohibits works focused on promoting dangerous or self-destructive topics (eg. high-risk acts and challenges, disordered eating, suicide, self-harm or self-injury) that pose risk to the physical, mental, or emotional health of those on the platform.”
Patreon Community Guidelines
What if the act in question doesn’t pose a risk, but instead helps the physical, mental, and emotional health of those on the platform? Kink has been long accepted to be a positive influence on its practitioners, providing enough mental and emotional benefits that physical health also can be improved. A feeding kink can be indulged in a healthy manner, in moderation.
Further, what about depictions of feederism such as cartoons or fiction? Those pose no risk whatsoever to anyone on the platform. Any clarification would be appreciated.
Clarification on “promoting,” “normalizing,” and “glorifying” language in Patreon Community Guidelines
“Promoting, normalizing, providing instructional advice about, coordinating, or otherwise glorifying disordered eating, feederism, or related topics is prohibited on Patreon.”
Patreon Community Guidelines
“Promoting,” “normalizing,” and “glorifying” are broad enough terms that they could mean anything. “Normalizing” in particular—does any positive depiction of a person who has disordered eating or is involved in feederism violate the Community Guidelines? Is publishing a work intended to reach out to people involved in feederism and reassure them that they’re not morally compromised people “normalizing,” “promoting,” or “glorifying” feederism?
Clarification on “disordered eating works” in Patreon Community Guidelines
“Examples of disordered eating works include, but are not limited to: extreme low-calorie diets, imagery of someone making themselves vomit, and imagery focused on ribs, thigh gaps, concave stomachs, and so forth.”
Patreon Community Guidelines
Some people have thigh gaps. Some people have concave stomachs. The creator can’t help that. How is that an appropriate restriction on content?
Clarification on “feederism works” in Community Guidelines
“Examples of feederism works include, but are not limited to: force feeding (consensual or nonconsensual), using illegal or controlled substances to achieve weight gain, using devices to fill the stomach, and so forth.”
Patreon Community Guidelines
Force feeding (consensual): In a risk-aware, consensual situation, this does not have any risk to the physical, mental, or emotional health of those on the platform. Depictions of the act in fiction or art also poses no risk whatsoever. Given that the prohibition is on works focused on promoting dangerous or self-destructive topics which “pose risk to the physical, mental, or emotional health of those on the platform,” how is this against Community Guidelines?
Force feeding (nonconsensual): Would this violate Community Guidelines in a situation where it does not present risk to the physical, mental, or emotional health of those on the platform? This is depicted in Bugs Bunny cartoons. Nobody argues that Bugs Bunny poses a risk of harm.
Using illegal or controlled substances to achieve weight gain: The legality and level of control of a substance is widely variable between jurisdictions. Further, I’m not aware of a controlled substance commonly used for the purposes of weight gain. Over the counter products like Boost, however, can and are used for this purpose. Is that against Community Guidelines?
Using devices to fill the stomach: What constitutes a “device to fill the stomach?” Is a nasogastric tube, used when a person is physically incapable of being fed through the mouth, against Community Guidelines?
Clarification on permitted works involving “disordered eating, feederism, and related topics” in Community Guidelines
“Works involving disordered eating, feederism, and related topics that have a community support or educational focus, are part of a greater narrative, or are otherwise contextualized in a manner that abides by Patreon’s guidelines are permitted. Also permitted are works that promote body positivity, eating competitions, medical surgeries, and health, fitness, or lifestyle works.”
Patreon Community Guidelines
What is a “community support” focus? What educational ends are acceptably within Patreon’s guidelines? What context would make a work include feederism or disordered eating permitted under the Community Guidelines? How are eating competitions allowed if the mere act of eating excessively is harmful enough to the creator to ban it?
