Oh my gosh! Who in their right mind would draw a naked caterpillar. There are so many legs - and people can see between each pair of them! Next thing you know, people will be posting illegal larva-porn - and larva-philes will be popping up everywhere!!

I'm not a fan of cub porn, so I don't know what you're assuming I like. I'm an adult. My fursona is an adult. The only sexual situations I'm ever in are with other consenting adults. Sure, my fursona wears cub-style shortalls and toon character clothing, carries a plushie or wears a plush backpack, as those are what I normally wear every day in real life too, and no one has ever complained.

Yes, my fursona has been drawn as a cub by several artists, but none of those images contain sexual themes. I don't seek out sexually themed stuff with cubs in it, because it does nothing for me. Purely fictional stuff doesn't bother me, but I prefer to not collect or post cub porn. I fave a fair amount of sexually themed art, but it's adult characters with other consenting adults.

I don't like the fact that sites are pressured into banning any sort of fictional artistic expression. But, I don't blame the sites when they do it though. If I were a site owner, and I was threatened with legal action, I'd likely ban whatever it was too. When the choices are delete the site, ban a topic, or risk going to jail, banning a topic is the least bad. This is especially true when the topic is only used by 4 percent of the users. It still sucks, but it sucks a lot less than the other options.

When I'm horny and aroused, then yes, peeing myself is a fetish. Normally, that is not the case though.

I started wetting myself when I was only six years old. It most definitely was not a fetish. I had no clue what sexual stuff was until many years later, as a teenager. Any depictions of me wetting as a child are non-sexual. Most depictions of me wetting as an adult are also non-sexual. If I post something that has sexual intent, then I mark it as adult, and the description makes it obvious.

Lots of kids intentionally wet their pants for any number of reasons. In most cases, it is not sexual. Some do it simply because the warmth or the wetness feels good. Some like how it smells. Some just like going against the rules. Some do it for attention. There are dozens of non-sexual reasons that a kid, or an adult, might intentionally wet themselves.

I was already wetting for five or six years before puberty came about. At that point, it evolved into a fetish for me. But, even after that, most peeing that I did was not connected to the fetish. For example, if I needed to pee, it was just peeing.

I don't get aroused from just peeing, or wetting in pants. Other conditions must be in place for arousal to happen. Some of those conditions include a reasonable chance of being able to complete the process, and a fair assurance that someone won't walk in on me! My mind doesn't even kick into fetish mode, unless a bunch of conditions are in place. Kids innocently wetting pants in a playground aren't even close to meeting those conditions.

Your assumption that pants-wetting is always sexual is mostly opposite of my lifelong experience as a wetter. Please don't assume that something is sexual when it isn't implied.

I've wet for non-arousing, non-fetish reasons many times in public, and no one ever realized it. I don't call attention to it, and I do it discretely. Most of the time, it's during a walk at night, or in places with little or no people.

I leave my fetish wetting at home though, because it means I'd be intending to get off to it - something I don't do in public.

kink shaming is bad and part of what leads to such censorship.

"First of all, if a kink involves children it has already gone too far."

first of all, learn the difference between fiction and non-fiction because there IS a difference. they are NOT the same thing.

"The furry fandom is really accepting of all sorts of things but some things should not be accepted."

oh, you got that right! and that's a big part of what is making it increasingly worse to be a part of.

"It's not up to me to decide if it is right or wrong but this definitely seems wrong... "

you're right. it's not you're decision to decide what is right or wrong. nor is it your right to tell people what content they are or aren't allowed to view just because you disapprove of the content in question.

guess what. i like cub content too. there is NOTHING wrong with that because cub content features fictional characters that do not exist irl. no one is harmed by such contents existence, creation, or consumption.

BUT you disapprove of it and as such it has to be banned and censored to satisfy your (and people like you) belief that it is wrong and bad and no one should be allowed to create and view it because you don't like it.

that's the problem with moral busybodies like you. you want to force your beliefs and views onto everyone else. when you don't like something, the thing you dislike has to be censored and banned because you don't think anyone should ever be allowed to view it or have an interest in it.

face it, you have NO right to say what other people are or are not allowed to view, create, or do. you don't GET to make that kind of decision for ANYONE except YOURSELF!

if i or anyone else wants to view cub content, you have absolutely NO say in the matter. you have an opinion and that is ALL you have!

but no...we have people like you who believe they have the right to dictate what other people are allowed to say or do and what kind of content they are allowed to view and create because only YOUR beliefs and opinion of what is right and wrong matters.

how about you be a better person and stop trying to control and dictate what other people are or aren't allowed to do instead of kink shaming them like a freaking CENSOR?

censorship is NEVER a good thing or an improvement.

"If he already makes that cub stuff apart of his every day life, what stops him from deciding he wants to try the real thing if he is already halfway there and being encouraged?"

halfway? then i'm halfway to being a murderer because i like playing violent video games.

"I dont think it should be encouraged for fear of actual children being harmed. "

then worry about actual irl children being harmed instead of works of fiction involving characters that don't exist irl and can;t actually be harmed as a result.

here's something to think about: in multiple studies done over the years it has been found and proven that people playing violent video games does not lead to said people becoming more violent irl or going out and committing crimes. rather the violent video games can serve as a harmless outlet for violent urges and tendencies and in fact leads to people being LESS violent.

as such, those who desperately seek to have violent video games banned no matter what would pretty much guarantee an increase in irl violence by removing that harmless outlet. because the people who enjoy such content would need to find an alternative form of entertainment that serves an equivalent purpose.

anti-pedo people who desperately seek to have any and all works of fiction involving under age characters that don't exist irl banned are the same way. you're seeking to have something harmless which may very well prove beneficial to society in some way by allowing people a harmless and safe means of acting on certain urges and tendencies without harming anyone irl.

what do you think will happen if all cub/shota/loli content gets banned? do you think people will just magically lose interest? of course not! if anything, they'll start seeking out alternative means to fulfill those desires and urges which likely would lead to an increase in IRL people being affected and probably harmed in various ways.

and make no mistake, i am not trying to defend irl pedophilia. i am opposing the censorship of works of fiction that are harmless.

this isn't about protecting children. this is about moral busybodies censoring content they don't like and think no one else should have access to as a result of them not liking it. you're not protecting anyone from anything by censoring things.

apology accepted and thank you for seeing reason.

i've encountered some people in the past who simply couldn't be reasoned with and it's always good to see that's not the case for everyone.

as for my text walls... i er...tend to get a bit ranty with topics i care a lot about. censorship in general being a big one.

You definitely overlooked the fact that kink and children never come together for me. When I'm wetting as a fetish, things tend to get very intense, and I don't partake in that with children. Likewise, when I was a child, well before I learned what sex was, well before the hormones of puberty gave me a sex drive, I was already intentionally peeing my pants. It's very unlikely that kids who were never exposed to sex are somehow enjoying a fetish when they wet themselves.

When someone draws me as a cub wetting my pants, I think of it just as I did when I was six years old. I have vivid memories from back then, and it was not fetishy. I peed myself for the same reasons that a kid might play in a mud puddle. I peed for fun. I peed to get dirty. I peed because it made my clothes smell good to me. I did not pee for sexual reasons, because I didn't know what that was. I still pee for those same innocent reasons most of the time, even as an adult. I just happen to pee for fetish reasons now as well. But, the fetish peeing is very different, and done for entirely different reasons when I do it, and not with cubs.

Please stop trying to link my fetishes to kids! That link is coming from your own mind, not mine!

yeah that’s totally the same thing lol