Quote from: Alone055 on Today at 03:19:24 PM

Doesn't porn mean having two or more people/animals indulged in intimate physical activities? Or even if it's one person/animal, there should at least be some tool/toy or hands involved that are being used to achieve pleasure.

Mere nudity, especially in case of animals, shouldn't be considered porn since they don't wear any clothes anyway.

Now, even if that cycle has something fixed in its seat, we can't know and hence can't assume that there is, because it has no visibility for us. Cheesy

What the op what's to make the pic on Foxpup's profile look less sexual is for the animal to where clothes and continue her cycling. At least, running shorts would help preserve his eyes from viewing that ungodly pic. I really don't understand how the picture looks sexual though. No matter how I turn my phone, I'm still not grabbing.