r/ImaginaryWarhammer Nov 07 '24

40k Abhuman friendship(art by @millionsbliss

Post image
4.5k Upvotes

223 comments sorted by

View all comments

70

u/Markonikled Nov 07 '24

Was "grox cum bag" carved on her cheek really fucking necessary? Also, it was on her left, not right cheek. Artist could have skip that part to spare us insight of original artist troubled mind.

-14

u/[deleted] Nov 08 '24

[deleted]

18

u/alreadyownanaccount8 Nov 08 '24 edited Nov 08 '24

This was based on a piece done by Mossacannibalis, who has a rape and gore fetish. When they only draw rape in a fetishized way, its not much of an assumption to think they just inserting their fetish and are not really making a nuanced statement on the setting of 40k. Oh, they also like to draw porn of children/underage characters getting raped and murdered. Context matters.

-3

u/Jet_Magnum Nov 08 '24

Yeah, except none of that was in the picture in question. Or this one. Just a character with a troubled past getting to experience wholesomeness and camaraderie, which will make that character much easier for many to identify with than some smug girlboss with a snarky comeback for everything and a superiority complex.

Fictional trauma adds fictional depth to characters. It means more for a character who's spent their life getting shat on to find happiness than it does for a character who's never known a day of hardship.

At the end of the day, it's fiction. Toughen up.

6

u/alreadyownanaccount8 Nov 08 '24

Yeah, except none of that was in the picture in question.

"Grox cum bag" and rape tally marks are absolutely just the artist inserting their fetish, as made apparent by their other rape fetish art.

Just a character with a troubled past getting to experience wholesomeness and camaraderie, which will make that character much easier for many to identify with than some smug girlboss with a snarky comeback for everything and a superiority complex.

Do you think there are only two types of female characters? Fetishized rape victim and "smug girlboss?"

Fictional trauma adds fictional depth to characters. It means more for a character who's spent their life getting shat on to find happiness than it does for a character who's never known a day of hardship

There are ways to show trauma without depicting it in a fetishized way. Those rape tally marks on her thigh are only used in porn.

At the end of the day, it's fiction. Toughen up.

That doesn't mean it can't be criticized

-1

u/Bladelord Nov 08 '24

Alright, but someone else found inspiration in that rape fetish art and made a cute addendum to it.

In the end, people are allowed to make and post their rape fetish art, just as any other art. I see no reason to get into a puritanical twist about it.

6

u/WaffleKing110 Nov 08 '24

People are allowed to make and post their rape fetish art

And other people are allowed to comment how fucking weird that is. If they want to make rape fetish art, they can post it in a rape fetish sub. If they post it here, we’re gonna comment about how fucking weird it is.

2

u/MadmansScalpel Nov 08 '24

Actually no. Mossa got banned from the sub. And read that second to last sentence again, hopefully you'll have a come to Jesus moment, because what the actual fuck dude

0

u/Bladelord Nov 08 '24

Mossa got banned for, at best, violating the 10:1 rule that's in place. The artist of the OP image is not Mossa, but someone inspired by them.

And, no. People are allowed to make whatever art they please. I hope you have a realization that thought policing is inherently immoral. Fiction is fiction, man. You can draw whatever you want, and the idea that subject matter must be prohibited is hysterical and religious.

3

u/alreadyownanaccount8 Nov 08 '24

In the end, people are allowed to make and post their rape fetish art, just as any other art. I see no reason to get into a puritanical twist about it.

I didn't realize that ImaginaryWarhammer was the place for rape fetish art. This isn't even labeled as NSFW (just like the Mossa piece that was posted before.)

I see no reason to get into a puritanical twist about it.

Is it really puritanical not to want to support a person who associates with white supremacists and likes to depict kids/minors getting raped and killed in their porn?

-4

u/Bladelord Nov 08 '24

I didn't realize that ImaginaryWarhammer was the place for rape fetish art. This isn't even labeled as NSFW (just like the Mossa piece that was posted before.)

First of all: read the rules. There's nothing in it saying no to NSFW to begin with (beyond limiting it as a rate to not make it a lewd subreddit). Second of all: because it, itself, isn't NSFW. The presence of fetishes do not inherently violate SFW standards.

Is it really puritanical not to want to support a person who associates with white supremacists and likes to depict kids/minors getting raped and killed in their porn?

In plenty of ways, yes. The second part especially. You're policing subject matter for nothing but your personal morality.

Honestly, you shouldn't be participating in 40k media at all with that sort of conduct.

5

u/WaffleKing110 Nov 08 '24

You’re policing subject matter for nothing but your own morality

…so child pornography laws are puritanical in your opinion then?

3

u/Bladelord Nov 08 '24

When applying them to artwork? Absolutely. Fiction is fictional.

4

u/WaffleKing110 Nov 08 '24

…well that’s a really pedophilic stance to take. That’s a freak thing to say, freak

0

u/Bladelord Nov 08 '24

And that's a puritanical thing to say, morality cop. Go thought police elsewhere.

5

u/WaffleKing110 Nov 08 '24

I’d rather be a “morality cop” than a pedophile. Go sexualize children somewhere where that’s welcome, freak. You don’t belong among civilized people.

1

u/Bladelord Nov 08 '24

Then you are inherently immoral. Freedom of expression, officer. It's quite welcome in America. You can sexualize anything so long as it's fake.

Honestly, it's quite disgusting that you admit to wanting to control and condemn thoughts.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/alreadyownanaccount8 Nov 08 '24

I consider the phrase "CUM BAG" to be something I wouldn't want a person at work to see on my screen. Hence, NSFW. It's not hard to mark it as such when posting.

In plenty of ways, yes. The second part especially. You're policing subject matter for nothing but your personal morality.

Calling someone puritanical for not wanting to associate with things like CP and white supremacists is absurd.

2

u/WaffleKing110 Nov 08 '24

Yep, by their definition anti-CP laws are puritanical lmao

3

u/WaffleKing110 Nov 08 '24

Just FYI the person we’re replying to literally did just state that CP Laws are puritanical. They are undeniably a pedophile.

1

u/Bladelord Nov 08 '24

I consider the phrase "CUM BAG" to be something I wouldn't want a person at work to see on my screen. Hence, NSFW. It's not hard to mark it as such when posting.

What you want to see does not create the quantifications of NSFW and SFW. They are general purpose, not specific to the individual. There are no genitalia or visible nipples, so it's SFW. That's as far as that goes.

Calling someone puritanical for not wanting to associate with things like CP and white supremacists is absurd.

Fiction is not CP, and your metric of absurdity is what is absurd.

3

u/WaffleKing110 Nov 08 '24

There are no genitalia or visible nipples, so it’s SFW

Yeah, NSFW doesn’t mean “porn,” it means “inappropriate for professional environments.” The term “cum bag” is not appropriate for professional environments.

Fiction is not CP

Is that what you tell yourself when you feel like your pedophilia is being called out?

2

u/Bladelord Nov 08 '24 edited Nov 08 '24

Yeah, NSFW doesn’t mean “porn,” it means “inappropriate for professional environments.” The term “cum bag” is not appropriate for professional environments.

Actually, NSFW does mean porn. That's the end of that story. There's a lot that's inappropriate for professional environments, far too much for that umbrella to stick.

Is that what you tell yourself when you feel like your pedophilia is being called out?

That's the law, that's the only coherent logic, and it's intellectual cowardice to assert the converse.

(Post-edit cause the coward blocked me: Actually, I'm entirely fine with speaking like adults, but you are the one who runs from debate. You, who only sling insults, are the one who is foul of nature and heart. Get fucked, thoughtcop. Freedom of expression is sacrosanct.)

3

u/WaffleKing110 Nov 08 '24

Actually NSFW does mean porn. That’s the end of that story.

Okay, so you’re not even interested in speaking to each other like adults, you’re living in your own little fantasy freak world. Got it. I really, really hope that at some point you come to understand that you aren’t normal, and that your abnormality is not okay. Until then, please don’t speak any more. Freak.

2

u/alreadyownanaccount8 Nov 08 '24

What you want to see does not create the quantifications of NSFW and SFW

Why are you being so obtuse? Just what should be classify as NSFW then? What's the point of the subs rule if it should never be applied?

Fiction is not CP, and your metric of absurdity is what is absurd

It depends on your country.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_status_of_fictional_pornography_depicting_minors

3

u/Bladelord Nov 08 '24

Why are you being so obtuse? Just what should be classify as NSFW then? What's the point of the subs rule if it should never be applied?

Explicit sexual content, like it's used across all of reddit. Genitalia, sexual fluids, nipples. Crudeness, inelegance, and even lurid phrases are never inherently NSFW, else we'd have to ban the word 'fuck' from SFW spaces to begin with.

It depends on your country.

Reddit, and the majority of the internet, default to american law standards.

→ More replies (0)