Overwatch hits the Rule 34 so freaking hard, that people joke the porn is so good that they made a game out of it. Memetic Mutation barely describes it.
Jumping on the wagon and running with it, people also consider the porn to be of higher quality than the game, at least after Activision monetized the hell out of it.
I'm surprised there's no porn with the DC villain Lock-Up. He's used as a featured image on two (!) tvtropes articles "Wardens are Evil" and "The Jailer", and there's plenty of porn with other DC characters, and yet somehow there's no porn with him anywhere!
Hide / Show Replies
Don't draw attention ro it or there will be! I've just discovered a favourite cartoon strip appears to have no Rule 34 whatsoever - but I'm buggered if I mention which one, or there very soon will be. I'm not calling it into being....
Male, early sixties, Cranky old fart, at least two decades behind. So you have been warned. Functionally illiterate in several languages.
Unfortunately, while the rule might cover all fandoms, it doesn't cover all characters or pairings, and it definitely doesn't cover all kinks for all characters/pairings. Please keep those of us with small fandoms and obscure kinks in your thoughts.
I made this Idolized Julius Kingsley icon back when Akito first came out, and now that the crossover is actually happening, I don't care.
I figured out where the rule fails: the Monument Valley games.
(And no, you're not allowed to immediately go write some just to mess with my science!)
I'm not so sure the "do a Google image search (filters off) of, well, pretty much anything" is so accurate anymore. Google has got better and better at giving relevant results over the years, so you see this less and less anymore, if at all (even if filtering is off.)
Hide / Show Replies
Does the rule still apply to things that are already Porn with Plot, or are the fans less likely to bother then?
Hide / Show Replies
I suspect less likely, myself. And since it's already porn, many would likely be mere fanworks.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
It seems that Rule 34 can be split into two subsets:
- Everything is someone's fetish, and to that end any activity has been the subject of porn at some point.
- Every series, film, comic, etc. is someone's object of affection, and to that end there is pornographic fan art of everything.
Good idea expect it interwines a lot.
Edited by Tambov333 Please join these multinational petitions against ACTA. Sign up now. Every voice counts.
I would like to propose a subset to rule 34 because there is apparently a Lego version of the 50 Shades of Grey movie trailer.
Subsection 34L: If it exists and there is porn of it..there will also be Lego version of said porn.
Chewbacca walked into the spaceport and didn't know where to look Battlestar Galactica was doing it with the Millennium Falcon.
This is the only exception I have found to Rule 34. I DARE you! http://www.amazon.com/Angels-Command-Castaways-Flying-Dutchman/dp/0142402850
Also no porn of leaves or US Immigration Laws
Would it be worth mentioning that any game that has women in it has a nude patch or mod somewhere out there? Would that be its own rule or a corollary of rule 34?
Hide / Show Replies
Rule 34c: For any attractive female video game character, there is either an actual nudity patch for that character, rumors of a nude patch for her, or a parody expy of her in a hentai game.
There you go!
Sanity is overrated
Referring to the evil overlord list.
How is turning into a giant snake not this trope? And any thoughts on this article?
Because snakes aren't inherently actual porn, even if sometimes they are used as phallic symbols.
That was the amazing part. Things just keep going.
I'd like to suggest that the conspicuously Italicized "irrefutable proof" phrase in the opening paragraphs of this trope be removed, on the grounds that it is untrue and outright false. I would have just edited it as such, but you can see the edit war on that one coming from a mile away :D
I'm suggesting this change based on the grounds that even a small handful of searches seeking to prove this claim either way has, to me at least, very definitely and clearly *dis*proven it.
Case in point, "Veggie Tales" brings up no *extensive* pornography(and certainly not to the extent that there are storylines, storyboards, posters, fanfics, etc. made by fans detailing sexual escapades such as others which are definitely in the Rule 34), and what does exist is quite mild and/or unintentional or "found porn"(such as the "penis silhouette" one...which is a long-shot candidate for Rule 34 at best, imo).
But even better proof that the Italicized "irrefutable proof" statement is wrong is that a search for both "Casey & Finnegan porn", "Mr Dressup porn" and "The Friendly Giant porn", or any of their related search terms, brings up absolutely *NO* Rule 34 content whatsoever...at least not to my search results, which were again done specifically to explore and/or prove Rule 34 to be true or not, either way.
There are also other instances noted on this very discussion page of further exceptions/omissions to Rule 34, which at this point seems to indicate that there are indeed "exceptions" to the "no exceptions" part of Rule 34...doesn't it?
Barring that, then it should be noted that there is a certain threshold of popularity *above which popular culture must meet* before it becomes mega-mainstream/fringe enough that there will be the noted "porn of it(...no exceptions)"; ie: it has to have reached a certain amount of people(and a certain segment of those people) with a certain amount of interest(and a certain kind of interest) for there to be people to want to(and do) create "porn of it".
(In this case, not enough people have seen the Canadian programs "The Friendly Giant" and "Mr. Dressup" for there to be "porn of it").
Otherwise, there are *definitely* exceptions, and there is certainly "refutable proof" of it to the contrary, and the Italicized "irrefutable proof" statement should be removed from the page.
Hide / Show Replies
It's a joke. Hence the italics.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them.
really...? lol, I didn't, and honestly still don't, get it...even with it being pointed out *as* a joke :P it looks and seems serious to me :I
If that's the case(and I still need to be convinced of that fact), then can it be retooled in order to make the joke more obvious then? or to point the joke out, etc? like maybe a "Blatant Lies" hyperlink, etc?
Edited by 69.172.221.2
I have actually found an exception to Rule34: Vicki Fox, a webcomic created by Mike Russell of Florida. I've searched on Deviant Art, Sheezy Art, Hentai Foundry and, *gasp* Furaffinity and have NOT found ONE piece of Rule34. No wonder his Fanwork Ban works so well.
Hide / Show Replies
...Did you try Google Image Search with the SafeSearch off? There are several on the first page.
If you're looking for things that won't be Rule 34'd, you definitely shouldn't start with furry webcomics.
On that note, God and Chuck Norris might be the exception TO the rule....unless someone can prove otherwise, anyway X(
Far as I know the only depiction I can think of of God that hasn't been are the South Park god and the Golden Compass god. Big Sandal Greybeard gets around as much as Zeus!
To Ye Olde Luke -I searched Google Image Search like you said and found this - http://rule34.paheal.net/post/view/56206#search=webcomic
I guess I'm wrong.
PS - Should I tell Russell about it? He'd probably explode into anger (which would be sweet).
As surprised as I am that he hasn't discovered the Debbie rule 34 that has been made, I am genuinely afraid to inform him of it because I would be the first one he'd point at to his lawyers as a suspect of creating offensive fan art of his "webcomic". As someone who generally wishes to be left alone, I DON'T want to attract that kind of attention, regardless of whether or not I drew any Vicki Fox porn.
ヴァンクル
To be honest, I've seen NO Rule 34 on the MOTHER series. There was one rule 63 pic I saw on Earth Bound, but that was it.
Harley Quinn hyenaholic
Is it true? There's really no Discworld porn? Well, I reflexively searched on my favorite porn site. And while there are some pictures of the chicks of Discworld naked, some things stand out.
1: It's mainly solo chicks.
2: There's some lesbian art (and not much of that), but no man on man.
3: There's some unlikely pairings, but no Crack-Pairings. Nothing like you've seen in other fandoms of similar popularity, anyway.
4: There's not much of it. Compare it to something like Sonic the Hedgehog, with over 10,000 pictures. Discworld has less than 70 - and some of those are pretty debateable as counting as Discworld OR porn.
Edited by HarleyQuinnhyenaholic
All right, I know we're not the Rule 34 repository, but could someone please tell me where porn of the "...Calvin and Hobbes?" guy is? I can't even think of what I'd Google to find that Rule 34.
Hide / Show Replies
I would think you can find whatever you want by turning safe search off and Google image searching _____'_ ______ ____ Rule 34 or _______ ___ _____ having sex.
He's not famous enough probably, but if you search for "Rule34" and "Meme" you will....... Wish you hadn't. Especially when you hit the Jissousekis.
I hope this is the right place to ask this.. anyway, I've seen this popping up on some works pages, sometimes with such justifications as:
- Rule34: It's a game from Japan.
That's uh.. we're supposed to remove entries like that, right?
I noticed something else: the more a thing is prone to be porn or adult by itself, the less content of rule34 can be found. It's like a Barbra Streisand effect over repressed creativity. The more the thing is devoid of pornographic references on the original content, the more you are likely to find rule34 of it. It is like a balance.
Baldurs Gate 3? Barely original content. GTA? almost can`t find something truly original.
Sailor Moon? Gigabytes of it.