Behind Chugworth's Doors (VERY NSFW, POTENTIALLY OFFENSIVE)

[[AOD]]

This is what Dave said regarding his past art at another forum:

"I got bored of it, grew out of it, and now do something I think is more worthwhile and enjoyable. (Note, something more worthwhile isn't coming to a message board with the express intention of revealling "dark secrets" that everyone already knows about" =O!!!!)"

[...]

"I think my style has come on a lot faster in the last year doing Chugworth and year and a bit before that doing Lonley Hearts than it had before doing pr0n. Cos let's face it, there's only so many ways you can draw people having sex, it's bound to get stale when you leave the "hormonal middle-teen" stage."

I think we should just leave him alone.

You make a good point, but you forget that Dave was not specifically addressing the question of prepubescent hentai, per se, but his previous involvement with the hentai industry in general, that is to say, the fact that he did, in fact, draw hentai for money. He does not, however, address why or for whom he drew the pictures in question.

The prosecution rests.

@~AoD

[X space coyote X]

Why should he have to explain himself in the first place?

Bah, I can see this thread getting ugly real fast. I'm out.

[[AOD]]

I find this witch hunt very hysterical. Exploiting real life children is one thing, but this is all just lines on paper. What's funny is how some of you have tried to extrapolate it to say that he must watch real life kiddie porn or wants to go out and rape little kids. The same logic says Stephen King must want to go out and kill people, because that's what he writes about. What's truly shameful here is how people try to build a case on a guy based on some drawings he did in his past. If some of you only knew what half your favorite Japanese artists were drawing BEFORE they got famous...

Sure it's tasteless, but as I said, it's only lines on paper, and no one is telling you to look, and no one was actually harmed while drawing them.

Van Douchebag not objecting to the fact that it is tasteless, or that it's fictional, or that it's only 'lines on paper'. It is the principle behind the drawings, the motivation, which he is pursuing. VD is questioning Dave's moral principles, not vilifying the art in question as evidence of actual paedophilia.

Why should he have to explain himself in the first place?

Bah, I can see this thread getting ugly real fast. I'm out.

He should explain himself in order for us to have a complete and objective opinion pertaining to the subject of debate. With only Van Douchebag's questionable opinions (given VD's past animosity with Dave/Scribblekid) to base our judgment on, our views must then be inherently biased. Given Dave's explanation, perhaps we can come to a more objective conclusion thereby.

Also, having more information would perhaps lend this thread to something other than a flame war erupting from the baseless accusations of one individual trying to spoil the reputation of another.

Food for thought.

@~AoD

[Hard]

Why should he have to explain himself in the first place?

Bah, I can see this thread getting ugly real fast. I'm out.

1. Because it's a witch hunt, and people want to see someone burn! If Chugworth wasn't a popular comic, no one would blink twice ... as no one did, when Chugworth didn't have as many readers as it does now and it was doing lolicon hentai. Now that it's popular, people are offended? Hmmm.

2. What will happen is it will get ugly. Then people will get bored of it because no one can change their past anyways -- nothing CAN BE DONE about it. A new witch hunt will occur elsewhere and people will forget about it for about half a year, when someone will bring it up again, people will act shocked, etc etc.

[Soap Soaperson]

I find this witch hunt very hysterical. Exploiting real life children is one thing, but this is all just lines on paper. What's funny is how some of you have tried to extrapolate it to say that he must watch real life kiddie porn or wants to go out and rape little kids.

OMG! I BET U LIKE NECRO IRL BECAUSE U DRAW IT

[Hard]

OMG! I BET U LIKE NECRO IRL BECAUSE U DRAW IT

You know how they say a mind is a terrible thing to waste? Well, so is a body.

[TheGoobla]

You know what, it's a dirty job but somebody's got to do it.

* Runs away and proceeds to remove all traces of his involvement to AGNPH from the internet *

[Jackhass]

Oh, puh-leeze.

How naive are you people?

Do you honestly think some guy who goes through the trouble of drawing kiddie and snuff porn on the net doesn't watch this stuff? I mean, it's not like it's hard to find any sort of sick crap you want on the internet. And if you're watching the real thing you're supporting the abuse of these kids.

Have any of you just sat down one day and said "hey, just for chuckles, I think I'll draw a picture of a mutilated naked child and post it on the net"? Of course you don't, you'd have to have a pretty intense interest in such things to do that...or just be an extremely low down and crass individual willing to do anything for attention/exposure.

Oh, and I love all the mentions of "art"...yeah, okay. This guy is really some artist...he can't even draw partcularly well. Just the same crude generic anime crap that fills 90% of webcomics...so I'm not cutting him any slack for being an "artist".

[Hard]

Van Douchebag not objecting to the fact that it is tasteless, or that it's fictional, or that it's only 'lines on paper'. It is the principle behind the drawings, the motivation, which he is pursuing. VD is questioning Dave's moral principles, not vilifying the art in question as evidence of actual paedophilia.

Oh, so this is Thought Police stuff. My mistake, I thought people were arguing about things that might actually be their business instead of what's going on inside a complete stranger's head.

He should explain himself in order for us to have a complete and objective opinion pertaining to the subject of debate. With only Van Douchebag's questionable opinions (given VD's past animosity with Dave/Scribblekid) to base our judgment on, our views must then be inherently biased. Given Dave's explanation, perhaps we can come to a more objective conclusion thereby.

If he feels like he has to explain himself now, then he'll have to EVERY TIME this comes up, and you bet it will again and again. This is just stuff in the past. He's moved on, and no one was actually harmed. Why can't anyone else move on as well?

[TheGoobla]

Do you honestly think some guy who goes through the trouble of drawing kiddie and snuff porn on the net doesn't watch this stuff?

Yes. How I know this, I will not say.

Have any of you just sat down one day and said "hey, just for chuckles, I think I'll draw a picture of a mutilated naked child and post it on the net"?

All the time. Point?

Of course you don't,

Don't put words in my mouth.

you'd have to have a pretty intense interest in such things to do that...or just be an extremely low down and crass individual willing to do anything for attention/exposure.

And?

This is sort of like the tentacle rape genre. You think guys who get off on that hentai would be aroused seeing a woman brutally raped by a giant fucking octopus? Come on.

Althought that scene from Evil Dead... *growl*

[Jackhass]

Wow, aren't you the ever-so cool cynical anti-establishment one Goobla. OMG! Look...your sig says something about Jesus raping someone. TAKE THAT ORGANIZED RELIGION! Haw haw! You joked about how you like kiddie porn! STICKIN' IT TO THE MAN! Nobody controls what you say or do.

Oh, and your argument there is moronic. Of course someone isn't going to get turned on by a giant tenticle monster in real life...because they don't exist in real life...

[Hard]

Oh, puh-leeze.

How naive are you people?

Do you honestly think some guy who goes through the trouble of drawing kiddie and snuff porn on the net doesn't watch this stuff? I mean, it's not like it's hard to find any sort of sick crap you want on the internet. And if you're watching the real thing you're supporting the abuse of these kids.

Do you know what a "slippery slope" argument is? It's when you make an assumption, then argue on the basis of that assumption as if it's correct, totally ignoring the fact that your initial argument is only an assumption. You're saying that he's supporting abuse of children because he must watch these videos, even though there is not an inch of support for saying that he does. If you are accusing him of watching kiddie porn then you are libeling him.

Oh, and I love all the mentions of "art"...yeah, okay. This guy is really some artist...he can't even draw partcularly well. Just the same crude generic anime crap that fills 90% of webcomics...so I'm not cutting him any slack for being an "artist".

Now you are acting like a child. I wouldn't if I were you, you may be in danger of being molested by Dave, after all, he MUST do that kind of thing since he draws it.

[Van Douchebag]

I can't believe people defend him.
That's repulsive.

There is a fine line between art and shit.
Drawing naked little girls, dead or not, is not art - it's getting your jack on. Or in this case, getting your jack off.
People like that are pigs and there is no excuse to that.

It is a shame that people cannot be persecuted for obscenity for this.

And saying that just because he draws it doesn't mean he won't do it is a crock. Most pedophiles don't molest children but rather exist in lucritive kiddie porn trade rings. There is no difference.

[Jackhass]

I'd say the fact that he goes through the trouble of drawing and posting this stuff on the net is far more than an inch of evidence that he's interested in this sort of thing.

But whaaaatever. I have better things to do than argue about what some guy who makes a bad webcomic likes to masturbate to in his spare time...

[TheGoobla]

Wow, aren't you the ever-so cool cynical anti-establishment one Goobla. OMG! Look...your sig says something about Jesus raping someone. TAKE THAT ORGANIZED RELIGION! Haw haw! You joked about how you like kiddie porn! STICKIN' IT TO THE MAN! Nobody controls what you say or do.

What scathing sarcasm. Give it up. That brand of sarcasm is rarely funny and never witty online.

Oh, and your argument there is moronic. Of course someone isn't going to get turned on by a giant tenticle monster in real life...because they don't exist in real life...

So the Octopus, like I wrote above, is a fictional creature? Invented by those dirty pedo Japs?

Look, I'm a sick fuck. You can say all the shit you want about me, I don't care. I'm comfortable with the persecution. Years of beating beat into the head with derogatives builds up a thick skin.

And for certain reasons, I am the last one -- and half of you probably are too, that should be denouncing a victimless crime because it squicks me.

You want to know what's sick?



THAT'S SICK.

A fictional character from the cartoon Digimon being raped by a card? Forgive me, but that's fucking hilarious.


Why is it that I get the sneaking suspicion that you think furry porn counts as drawing beastiality?

[Jackhass]

"It is a shame that people cannot be persecuted for obscenity for this."

Sure you can...plenty of laws out there against this kind of garbage.

"So the Octopus, like I wrote above, is a fictional creature? Invented by those dirty pedo Japs?"

Maybe you need to brush up on biology...octopuses don't have sex with humans in the real world. Oh, and yes, because I don't support a guy who draws kiddie porn it's somehow to be implied that I'm racist against the Japanese. Great argument.

[Van Douchebag]

Not when it comes to the internet, unfortunately.
If he was publicating it freely on paper and in stores he could be prosecuted, but on there internet there are no laws in place for this, hence the amount of pornography sites.

[Jackhass]

No, I'm pretty sure it's illegal on the internet too. It definitely is up here in Canada...couple of high profile kiddie porn rings shut down recently, and there was a big story about an S&M website being charged.

The cops just don't have the resources to track it all down...

[Hard]

And saying that just because he draws it doesn't mean he won't do it is a crock.

True. Thomas Harris, writer of the Hannibal Lector series, .. I totally expect him to start eating people. Or at least open a chain of fast food restraunts with the slogan "More than finger lickin' good."

Most pedophiles don't molest children but rather exist in lucritive kiddie porn trade rings. There is no difference.

Yes there is. To obtain kiddie porn real children must be victimized. If pedophiles were only trading pieces of art, I'd breathe a sigh of relief, wouldn't you?

[Van Douchebag]

Kiddie porn gets busted because it's illegal. There's a clause in the law that says cartoon lolicons can't be kiddie porn, which is pretty dumb because anyone fucking around in photoshop can make a picture altered enough to squeeze by that law.


Oh and hard, plzthxdie
People like you are have moral vacuums and are nothing but dirt for me to walk on.