It’s a common thing to see in artwork. Don’t know what the appeal is but it could be suitable for an entry.
Om nom nom.
This is Know Your Meme, not Know Your Fetish.
@Rene & TARDISES
Please at least try to take the subject serious. This is Meme Research, not JFF.
As for the topic itself, I’m personally not really a fan of absurd fetishes. Let’s look at tentacle porn first, a genre that is both famous and infamous for its style. I doubt Vore can be compared to this, how well both are known is just too much of a difference. We have an entry for tentacle rape, but it’s not the best quality and also not confirmed.
A better question here would be to compare it to smaller yet infamous “saucy” genres. Characters being inflated probably is the best comparison. Although both infamous, what presence do they have on the internet?
We currently don’t really cover fetishes, besides the extremely absurd ones or single shock sites. I would rather do some better research first, see what notability they have online, and what makes them unique to internet culture.
Do we have proof that this is an internet based trend? Or are we just going to make an entry for every sub-genre of pornography?
Because in all honesty, our fetish porn entries are terrible. I see no need to add to their number unless it’s highly relevant.
I’m with Random. Prove notability, and then we can talk. I mean if all we have to go on is “a lot of people draw it on the internet”, we might as well make an entry for virtually everything…
I think that if there is an entry of it, the focus should be more of the satire of it in online culture.
You see a great prevalence of it in drawn fetish pornography, the same as the diaper fetish, and is similarly mocked in online culture, but I’m not sure if I can justify that alone as a reason for an entry.