by EnderDracolich » Thu Aug 24, 2017 7:42 pm
I can't personally enjoy anything involving cruelty. Mind you, not all pain and torture is cruelty! I'm a masochist after all! However, when you are hurting someone for fun, without their permission or consent, that's pretty shitty. In fact, for ANYTHING non-consensual to make me NOT hate the predator, it has to be pretty clean and efficient; simple survival, eating for nutrition, not for sexual gratification. If you are going to murder a random stranger for food, don't make them suffer unnecessarily beforehand. If it is consensual, the torture has to be something the prey knew about ahead of time; if someone consents to Vore, but not to being beaten or tortured, you don't beat or torture them! Likewise, if you tell the prey you aren't going to kill them and then you do, that's not cool with me and deeply disturbs me. Betrayal pisses me off. No matter how hot it would otherwise be, if somebody kills or hurts someone who trusted them not to do so, I'm going to absolutely turned off from the whole thing (unless they get their just desserts, [pun intended?] for their evil deed; in that case, I can enjoy a good revenge plot!)
I'm only attracted to fictional characters I would not hate IRL; people who go around committing evil deeds don't really turn me on at all. So yeah, it gets in the way. So many predators are depicted as sociopaths who are totally fine murdering their friends while they beg for mercy! I just don't think that's an accurate reflection of how most people actually ARE; after all most people enjoy sex IRL, but only a minority commit rape. Most people have morals and empathy, and actually care about the people who they are in relationships with. I don't see why Vore should be any different. Characters who get their kink by forcing other people, especially those who trust them, to suffer for their arousal are bad people! (or rather would be, if they were real.)
EDIT: To clarify, since my post is loaded with moral and ethical language, I will provide some hypothetical scenarios to avoid offending anyone.
Example 1:
There is a pred named Sally. Sally tells her girlfriend Jody to climb into her stomach, because everything will be fine, she promises. Jody trusts Sally, so she complies, and climbs inside. Sally decides that she would rather digest Jody than let her out. Sally is a BAD PERSON, and I no longer like Sally. I do not find Sally's behavior to be arousing or attractive. I wish for bad things to befall Sally as the result of her actions. This DOES NOT reflect any animosity toward the person who wrote or drew the story, or to people who enjoy such content! My beef is entirely with the fictional character named Sally.
Example 2:
There is a pred named Sally. Sally tells her girlfriend Jody to climb into her stomach so she can digest her, and is open about her intentions. Jody knows this, but she complies anyway and climbs inside. Sally is a NOT a bad person, and I do not dislike Sally. This isn't actually my personal fetish, but I might still enjoy the story or other stories involving the Sally character.
Example 3:
Sally again. Same scenario as last time. This time, Jody refuses to be eaten, and Sally respects her wishes. Sally is NOT a bad person! As before, I have no bad feelings toward Sally.
Example 4:
Same as above, but Sally eats Jody despite her objections. Sally is a BAD PERSON. I don't like Sally, etc.
Example 5:
This time, we have a pred names Jessy. Because of her unique predator metabolism, she can only survive by eating other people. Jessy isn't interested in eating her friends or loved ones. Instead, she hunts down random strangers and devours them. She is not sadistic and does not prolong their suffering. Jessy is NOT (in my opinion) a bad person.
Example 6:
This time Jessy isn't just a simple predator. She enjoys torturing and mutilating her prey before hand, and prolongs their suffering to sate her fetish for sadism. This makes her a BAD PERSON. I don't like Jessy, etc.
...
Sometimes things can get ambiguous. If a pred like my hypothetical Jessy character chooses to lure her prey with promises of safety, but still only kills total strangers and does not prolong their suffering, (and still does it out of biological necessity) I don't really object to that. It's not quite "betrayal" if you are duping random Johns off the street, who you would have murdered anyhow, just to avoid a violent struggle. Generally however, if someone you know thinks you aren't going to hurt them, you really shouldn't do so. This is especially true for predators that only do it for pleasure, rather than biological necessity. In my opinion no predator should ever intentionally prolong the suffering of their prey, unless said prey willingly volunteered for EVERYTHING the predator does to them.
P.S. All of this only applies to sapient/intelligent predators. I don't claim to pass judgement upon simple minded animals. When I lioness eats a zebra, or even a human, it's not murder. Humans and their intellectual equals have special rules because they are capable of *understanding* the harm they are causing, and thus have an obligation to minimize said harm, especially when preying upon other sapient/intelligent entities.
P.P.S. Just to make it TRIPLE clear, I am only condemning the actions of the PREDATORS themselves (AKA the fictional characters people draw/write). I am not condemning the CREATORS (AKA real world people) of these characters! That would be like condemning George Lucas for the actions of Darth Vader!