nnyde

we’re in a bit dangerous waters because that same train of thought is used by real life animal abusers: “My dog is so intelligent, I can communicate with it and it’s sexually mature. Obviously it would give consent if it could speak.”

No. It would still need to give explicit consent if it were real.

But yes, I think everything should be allowed in fiction.

filling the white stuff in teeth

The image is there because that article references the Harkness Test, which initiated with:

Fans of furry pornography commonly distinguish it from zoophilia or bestiality, emphasizing that their interest is toward fictional characters depicted as sapient beings with human-like traits rather than real animals.

It’s more about "could give consent".

Fictional creatures can never give consent for real (because they’re fictional) and we cannot know if they would if they were real.

Yes, but that’s not how sexual fantasies work. There are probably few people who only masturbate to real people, who gave them permission to masturbate to them.

No, but it is also a bit about maturity. Harkness Test is a test to figure out if a creature is capable of giving consent and mature for its kind, roughly simplified. That’s relevant in-universe for fictional creatures.

Harkness Test is a test to figure out if a creature is capable of giving consent and mature, roughly simplified.

Lemmy also has an RSS feed