So now we are rambling about gays? Well f**k it... might as well join in on the fun.
See the funniest part about this is that Hassat Hunter is talking crap about flamboyant gays & there parades, yet a few pages back he was preaching about how furries are treated poorly & how we need to accept there lifestyle.
So let me get this straight... We should treat people equally & not judge them based simply on the fact that they are different from us.... well unless they show they are different. I mean god forbid that you SHOW that you are proud of who you are & don't feel the need to hide it... I mean they march in parades & act as they do to break down the walls & show though they are different in one sense, they really aren't all that different as human beings. I guess you could say they are just trying to get acceptance from the public.
Why does this sound familiar? Hmmmmm....
OH YEEEEAAAAHHH... You came out & defended furries because you are one.... not only that but you proudly admitted it & are doing everything but begging people to accept your FETISH.
I wish I had seen this thread earlier. Curse my not going on sub-forums to avoid spoilers!
For what it's worth, here is my personal take on it:
The way I see it, being a furry isn't simply about enjoying media with anthropomorphic animals in it. Just like being a Tolkien Geek isn't just about having read the books and finding them good. I think there is more to it.
I think being a furry is about relating to anthropomorphic animals on a deeper level. Like, it talks to you, in the same way elves or Vulcans might. Often it involve having your own fursona, a non-human character, which I'd equate to other similar roleplaying (for instance LARP). Having a character of a different race can allow you to do things you wouldn't normally be able to, and often with furrism (is that a word?) it can involve full-bodied suits which would be liberating as you can fully devote yourself to your character and hide the human completely.
Furrism associated to sex? I don't see it. Not at all. Sure it's common on the Internet, but so is gay porn, or straight porn, or any type of porn, ever, and that doesn't mean every person on the planet is obsessed with sex. Furrism as bestiality? Oh really? If they liked animals, why would they like characters who look more like humans than animals? Most zoophiles would rather look at a picture of your pet than furry porn, it would be more arousing for them. I seriously wish people would understand that.
And for that matter, Marge Simpson or really any character from the Simpson, South Park or many other cartoons with "humans" look less human than most anthropomorphic animals do. Yet if someone says "Marge is hot, I'd do her if she was real", it's suddenly less creepy?
Humans can picture stuff. We have imagination. If Marge Simpson can be considered hot when she looks like she's got light bulbs for eyes and a toilet brush for hair, I don't see why adding differently shaped ears and saying "it's a (insert non-human animal here)" should suddenly make anyone go "eww".
As for the persecution/bullying/prejudice thing, I think it's sad how people are always having a "mine is worse than yours" fight. Maybe your group has it worse, but injustice is injustice and there is no reason to brush it off just because you feel it's not that bad.
Maybe it isn't, but you know what? You haven't experienced it. And even if you know for a fact they don't have it as bad, it's no reason to go all "who cares about your suffering, my group has suffered more". Especially when it's mostly in the past for some.
I mean, I'm a woman, have I personally suffered prejudice from it? Not that I can think of. Is it still bad in some places? Yes, but I'm not going to go "hey, furry, I'm part of a group that in some places is prejudiced against even though I've never experienced it personally and am likely never to. Therefore I can disregard the fact that people treat you like shit every day, and you know what, I'll even take part in it."
I'm really disappointed in some people here. I'm with you Hassat, and I want to apologise that some of us non-furries are so insensitive and close-minded. We're not all like that.
So now we are rambling about gays? Well f**k it... might as well join in on the fun.
You haven't really read my last few posts, have you? We've gone over this.
See the funniest part about this is that Hassat Hunter is talking crap about flamboyant gays & there parades, yet a few pages back he was preaching about how furries are treated poorly & how we need to accept there lifestyle.
Are flamboyant gays & their parades really their lifestyle though? No, probably not. Same as our lifestyle isn't fucking each other all the time in furstuits.
Like said; I just think the way they parade about, and the media attention to that part gives being gay a negative image. And I personally would hate that.
I just think the way they parade about, and the media attention to that part gives being gay a negative image. And I personally would hate that.
I think I understand what you mean: that it's portraying all gays as being that way all the time when it's not true, and you're worried about it. However I think the way you phrase it is to blame for people's reactions: some people are flamboyant, and they're allowed to be. I feel your problem is more the lack of representation of non-flamboyant gays, which leads to generalisation.
I'd agree that generalisation can be a problem. Surely it leads to people going "you can't be gay! You're not flamboyant" or "gay people are just different, look at how they talk" or whatever. However it's important not to reject these people either. While it would be good for everyone to be represented in an accurate way, rejecting part of a group because they "make you look bad" isn't the way to go.
People who reject gays aren't likely to become fine with it because the flamboyant ones are sushed. And really, opening your mind to more people is better. It's not going to work against you, I don't think.
My point is, focus on the positive (for under-represented groups to be more represented) rather than the negative (for groups widely represented to be "hidden" more).
I will totally agree that the media uses that to show non-heterosexuality as that marginal, weird, quirky thing that's so different that "they're obviously not like us", and I know gay people who feel more pressured and prejudiced by that "gays are flamboyant" stereotype than by anything else (it's in France, mind you. Much less religion-based anti-gay stuff).
But my point is, the goal it to show that you're allowed to be non-straight and not be like that, rather than blame them for being that way.
So are you saying that feeling sexually drawn to children is OK? Are you saying that we should stop bullying adults in relationships with children by putting them in jail & labeling them sex offenders? I mean we haven't experienced what it is like to fall in love with a child, so how do we know the hardships that come with wanting something that is "unjustly" forbidden & looked down upon?
Does this sound ridiculous to you? I bet it does... as a matter of fact I bet you would be one of the first to proclaim that person was a sick f*** & want him locked up with the key thrown away.
Or another example.... assume you were with a trusted friend's house. You are on there computer & discover they have quite the fetish for beastiality & child porn. Deep down you know they are a good person, but I bet you anything that there fetishs would disgust you to the point you would never look at them the same.
I'm pretty much done anyways... The point is that this isn't an attack on Hassat Hunter, but so much the logic that being discriminated against for a fetish (& thats the key word there) that should stay behind closed doors anyways is ridiculous. I'm sure everybody has a fetish they find utterly disgusting (be it child porn, beastiality, golden showers, Scat, etc...) & given the platform will talk negatively about it. Hence why all fetishs should stay BEHIND CLOSED DOORS
My views are fairly straightforward: no victim = no crime.
Is being sexually attracted to children a crime? No. Is raping them a crime? Yes. Is looking at drawn porn of them a crime? No. Is looking a porn that involved actual children a crime? Yes.
If tomorrow I was suddenly sexually attracted to children, I would freak out as 99% of pedophiles do. You know, the ones who don't happen to also be rapists, yet are still put in the exact same category even if they never, in their entire life, harm a child in any way.
Now, when we're talking about people who decide to wear an outfit and have consensual sex, why the hell would I mind in any way? It doesn't mean I have to find it arousing or do it myself. Why would it be any of my business what they like to do? Why is it more socially accepted to consensual have sex with someone while pretending to be animals than, say, to cheat on your spouse?
Sure, cheating isn't glorified either, but people tend to be more comprehensive of it. It's more "normal". At least you're not a "freak", a "weirdo". Just someone who thinks it's okay to lie and betray someone you supposedly love.
Anyway, in short, being sexually aroused by something, anything, being sexually attracted to something, anything, is never a crime, no. Acting on it can be. Role-playing it, with the informed consent of everyone involved, certainly isn't, and if it's enough of a release to prevent you from actually doing it, then by all means, do so.
I feel we're losing track here though. The point is, being a furry isn't sexual in itself any more than playing D&D is sexual in itself. Hell, I'm sure there are asexual furries. And it's just ridiculous to associate things like that when they're simply not the same thing.
I'm with Avistew, especially in this case. People can't help sexual attraction. I'm attracted to women, but I don't go around molesting, raping, or taking advantage of women. The latter set of things is a crime, the former set of thoughts is simply some set of chemicals and mental wiring that I can't control. It's the same case with pedophiles, really. Am I disgusted by that particular desire? Yes, I am. But can I really say that they deserve to be maligned and persecuted if they aren't hurting or taking advantage of another person? Not really.
Furrism associated to sex? I don't see it. Not at all. Sure it's common on the Internet, but so is gay porn, or straight porn, or any type of porn, ever, and that doesn't mean every person on the planet is obsessed with sex.
So are you saying that porn has nothing to do with sex? Porn brings on sexual intentions. And also a quick Google Image search for "furry" brings up porn on the first page.
So are you saying that porn has nothing to do with sex? Porn brings on sexual intentions. And also a quick Google Image search for "furry" brings up porn on the first page.
And a quick search for "Women", "Girls", or "Cheerleaders" brings up porn on the first page. So what? Are you saying that people who look at porn are all rapists? That's going to be a tough position to defend. Even with the most liberal estimated number of unreported rapes per year, I don't think it can keep up with the muli-billion dollar porn industry.
And a quick search for "Women", "Girls", or "Cheerleaders" brings up porn on the first page. So what? Are you saying that people who look at porn are all rapists? That's going to be a tough position to defend. Even with the most liberal estimated number of unreported rapes per year, I don't think it can keep up with the muli-billion dollar porn industry.
My post didn't even have the word "rape" in it. Keep your arguments to the contents of my post.
I'm only saying that when you look at porn you can get a sexual urge, which therefore relates it to sex. Sure, Furries in general don't necessarily lead to porn, but it's just that the majority of it is, so we end up referring furries to porn half the time.
Porn has everything to do with sex. And it has much to do with the Internet, because it flourishes there for sure. That doesn't mean the Internet is all about sex. I have had very intelligent discussions on the Internet, made excellent friends, met people I love. And while I very much enjoy sex, I have very little interest in porn, so porn on the Internet has pretty much no impact on my life.
Furry porn certainly is sexual: it's porn! But that doesn't mean being a furry is all about sex.
ONE image on the first page was pornographic, meaning that none of the others were. Still more nonsexual stuff than sexual stuff by a very large margin (1 in 23 on my results). And glancing through the next couple pages, they had even less sexual content.
Surely, there is furry porn, but if it was inherently sexual, it seems to me that the images on the first page would all be porn except for one, rather than the other way around.
There is furry porn, there is furry sex, I don't deny that. I'm simply rejecting the "furry = sex" equation. Unless you're also saying "human = sex", but that's untrue too.
I really wanted to state my position on the issue after reading through the thread. I feel that I have done so and explained my position in a clear manner. If anyone has more questions, they should feel absolutely free to PM me about them, but I feel I don't have more to contribute to this discussion, nor do I want to contribute in turning it into something nasty.
Did I say it was? Once again, way to go out of context.
Alright. I was under the impression that "Porn brings on sexual intentions" amounted to "Porn brings on the intention to perform sexual actions that can be inappropriate". "Intention" as in "they mean to do something about it when they watch pornography". It was a matter of misunderstanding.
I'm actually quite alarmed at how quickly this thread took a turn for the worse, probably because of most people's inablility to articulate their ideas properly, as well as understand others points of view. I myself am at least guilty of the first and probably the second as well.
That's why I'm glad that there's people like Avistew who are much more able to present clear, consice points of view, although I'm slightly annoyed that the first negative reply seemed to somehow draw the conclusion that they thought child molestation was ok.
Also Bonefreak, a quick search for anything on google can bring up porn if you aren't careful, and especially if safesearch is off, that doesn't neccessarily make that thing sexual in nature, just that there is things of a sexual nature based on it. I believe the internet refers to it as rule 34?
This conception that "Furries = porn" thing though, where does it stem from? It's true that there's furry porn, and indeed there is a lot of it, however wherever or not there more of it than other fetishes is debatable. It does get a lot of bad press however. Shows like CSI have not been kind to it but then it's rarly kind to anything that isn't awesome cop forensics powers.
Has it just become the standard now to hate on furries? Do people just see the hate that is spouted and decide to join in? I would very much like to know.
As for the persecution/bullying/prejudice thing, I think it's sad how people are always having a "mine is worse than yours" fight. Maybe your group has it worse, but injustice is injustice and there is no reason to brush it off just because you feel it's not that bad.
Maybe it isn't, but you know what? You haven't experienced it. And even if you know for a fact they don't have it as bad, it's no reason to go all "who cares about your suffering, my group has suffered more". Especially when it's mostly in the past for some.
I'm assuming this is geared at me. But I'm just assuming. Durp
I have faced bullying all throughout my life for a variety of different reasons. I've hated it. I want to prevent it as much as I can, because I know that its ridiculous. I'm not a furry, but I think its stupid and frankly low of people to make fun of them or assume that they rape animals or whatever which is quite shallow and unlearned of an individual to say. I know some pretty cool furries as friends. Those who make fursuits, especially fursuits of excellent quality, are fountains of knowledge in the craft of costuming. On the flipside, I know furries that say that they're persecuted for what they love. Bullying may range from someone calling them a stupid name to a physical harm. I do not condone this at all, and I feel saddened by the fact that they are the current victim du jour on the internet right now. However, it crosses the line when someone says that the bullying of their hobbies and past times, which will forever be felt by anyone as long as there are two people on the earth, is special and is equivocal to those who have been treated like second class citizens with rights kept far from their reach and murder meeting them for just being born.
I have been demeaned and treated as second class due to my sex. I have managed to escape this path, but the fact will still remain that I will not be paid the same amount as an individual of the opposite sex. Nor if i chose to serve in the military would I be able to fill the same roles. Heck, for other reasons I can't even serve in the military honestly. I can't marry an individual I'm attracted to without moving at least 2000 miles away, and even then the federal law would not recognize it.
That said, I'm so lucky to have been born now, right now rather than 150 years ago, where my parents couldn't have gotten married, I wouldn't have been considered an American citizen, and even if I were I wouldn't be able to vote or work or treated like an equal in at the very least the eyes of the law.
And this is just for being born.
However, I cannot ever compare what I have gone through with the sufferings of those who had gone through that such as those who went through slavery or the holocaust. I just cannot do that. I can't even compare myself to women who are forced into arranged marriages. Because there is no comparison there. I morally cannot manipulate someone's hardship and demean it for my own benefit.
k now that i have that out of the way, im gonna go play my silly games about a cartoon rabbit and dog
Apparently the way I cope with uncomfortable arguments is to post links to semi-relevant xkcd comics.
But, erm, I more or less agree with the ever insightful and well-spoken Avistew. People should be free to do whatever they want as long as they're not hurting anyone. And mocking and attacking other people for having unusual hobbies and fetishes or for being flamboyant or eccentric isn't very nice.
can I jsut say when people said about pride festivles is embarsing and leting down the cause straight ppl do it to theres a whole subculture of straight guys livng the gays life style as metro sexuals and they act the same flamboint way but there not gay so the camp way of acting is a persnalaty tait rather then just a type of gay
Edit: why its a late reply is cos honistly it only just came to my mind about now Xp
can I jsut say when people said about pride festivles is embarsing and leting down the cause straight ppl do it to theres a whole subculture of straight guys livng the gays life style as metro sexuals and they act the same flamboint way but there not gay so the camp way of acting is a persnalaty tait rather then just a type of gay
Edit: why its a late reply is cos honistly it only just came to my mind about now Xp
What on earth happened to your Spellcheck in the last 24 hours?
You are all acting like dumbasses. Some of you are being intolerant jackasses, and the others think it is okay to deal with that by being intolerant jackasses as well.
This is a forum about video games, leave your politics at the door.
I hope the mods close this thread.
Wow, what kind of forum have I joined? I hate furries as much as the next person, but leave gay people out of this. This thread is showing the scum side of the Sam & Max group and should be closed and deleted.
stop whit this bashing of of human that are deficient than you I play video games to serapes that tort that human cat all get a long so one gay like guy
or like human animal things it well how they are if you don't like it then don't kept to you shelf and ps this is ironic because I hate wheel all of mankind sad ant it
stop whit this bashing of of human that are deficient than you I play video games to serapes that tort that human cat all get a long so one gay like guy
or like human animal things it well how they are if you don't like it then don't kept to you shelf and ps this is ironic because I hate wheel all of mankind sad ant it
What?
Anyway, I don't get how a piece of fanart (is it fanart? The link is broken.) can become "Copyright Infringement". Is there like a law where we're not allowed to post drawings of blasphemous hybrid animals on website now?
They were making a Sam & Max fangame, and charging people $50 to include their characters in it. But now they're making something else. Also the game was going to include gratuitous nudity, which wasn't well-received even on that site.
Porn has everything to do with sex. And it has much to do with the Internet, because it flourishes there for sure. That doesn't mean the Internet is all about sex.
Wow, what kind of forum have I joined? I hate furries as much as the next person, but leave gay people out of this. This thread is showing the scum side of the Sam & Max group and should be closed and deleted.
You are all acting like dumbasses. Some of you are being intolerant jackasses, and the others think it is okay to deal with that by being intolerant jackasses as well.
This is a forum about video games, leave your politics at the door.
I hope the mods close this thread.
wait wat
1) backseat modding yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
2) what's this about intolerance i'm hearing about? against who? from who? what?
3) hating furries is just plain childish.
Comments
I thnk way back they said summit about how they stoped to avoid lawsuit
Awesome! Now then, back to the regulary scheduled programming whatever it was.
Nice dodge...?
See the funniest part about this is that Hassat Hunter is talking crap about flamboyant gays & there parades, yet a few pages back he was preaching about how furries are treated poorly & how we need to accept there lifestyle.
So let me get this straight... We should treat people equally & not judge them based simply on the fact that they are different from us.... well unless they show they are different. I mean god forbid that you SHOW that you are proud of who you are & don't feel the need to hide it... I mean they march in parades & act as they do to break down the walls & show though they are different in one sense, they really aren't all that different as human beings. I guess you could say they are just trying to get acceptance from the public.
Why does this sound familiar? Hmmmmm....
OH YEEEEAAAAHHH... You came out & defended furries because you are one.... not only that but you proudly admitted it & are doing everything but begging people to accept your FETISH.
Kinda funny how that works isn't?
For what it's worth, here is my personal take on it:
The way I see it, being a furry isn't simply about enjoying media with anthropomorphic animals in it. Just like being a Tolkien Geek isn't just about having read the books and finding them good. I think there is more to it.
I think being a furry is about relating to anthropomorphic animals on a deeper level. Like, it talks to you, in the same way elves or Vulcans might. Often it involve having your own fursona, a non-human character, which I'd equate to other similar roleplaying (for instance LARP). Having a character of a different race can allow you to do things you wouldn't normally be able to, and often with furrism (is that a word?) it can involve full-bodied suits which would be liberating as you can fully devote yourself to your character and hide the human completely.
Furrism associated to sex? I don't see it. Not at all. Sure it's common on the Internet, but so is gay porn, or straight porn, or any type of porn, ever, and that doesn't mean every person on the planet is obsessed with sex. Furrism as bestiality? Oh really? If they liked animals, why would they like characters who look more like humans than animals? Most zoophiles would rather look at a picture of your pet than furry porn, it would be more arousing for them. I seriously wish people would understand that.
And for that matter, Marge Simpson or really any character from the Simpson, South Park or many other cartoons with "humans" look less human than most anthropomorphic animals do. Yet if someone says "Marge is hot, I'd do her if she was real", it's suddenly less creepy?
Humans can picture stuff. We have imagination. If Marge Simpson can be considered hot when she looks like she's got light bulbs for eyes and a toilet brush for hair, I don't see why adding differently shaped ears and saying "it's a (insert non-human animal here)" should suddenly make anyone go "eww".
As for the persecution/bullying/prejudice thing, I think it's sad how people are always having a "mine is worse than yours" fight. Maybe your group has it worse, but injustice is injustice and there is no reason to brush it off just because you feel it's not that bad.
Maybe it isn't, but you know what? You haven't experienced it. And even if you know for a fact they don't have it as bad, it's no reason to go all "who cares about your suffering, my group has suffered more". Especially when it's mostly in the past for some.
I mean, I'm a woman, have I personally suffered prejudice from it? Not that I can think of. Is it still bad in some places? Yes, but I'm not going to go "hey, furry, I'm part of a group that in some places is prejudiced against even though I've never experienced it personally and am likely never to. Therefore I can disregard the fact that people treat you like shit every day, and you know what, I'll even take part in it."
I'm really disappointed in some people here. I'm with you Hassat, and I want to apologise that some of us non-furries are so insensitive and close-minded. We're not all like that.
Like said; I just think the way they parade about, and the media attention to that part gives being gay a negative image. And I personally would hate that.
Thanks
I think I understand what you mean: that it's portraying all gays as being that way all the time when it's not true, and you're worried about it. However I think the way you phrase it is to blame for people's reactions: some people are flamboyant, and they're allowed to be. I feel your problem is more the lack of representation of non-flamboyant gays, which leads to generalisation.
I'd agree that generalisation can be a problem. Surely it leads to people going "you can't be gay! You're not flamboyant" or "gay people are just different, look at how they talk" or whatever. However it's important not to reject these people either. While it would be good for everyone to be represented in an accurate way, rejecting part of a group because they "make you look bad" isn't the way to go.
People who reject gays aren't likely to become fine with it because the flamboyant ones are sushed. And really, opening your mind to more people is better. It's not going to work against you, I don't think.
My point is, focus on the positive (for under-represented groups to be more represented) rather than the negative (for groups widely represented to be "hidden" more).
I will totally agree that the media uses that to show non-heterosexuality as that marginal, weird, quirky thing that's so different that "they're obviously not like us", and I know gay people who feel more pressured and prejudiced by that "gays are flamboyant" stereotype than by anything else (it's in France, mind you. Much less religion-based anti-gay stuff).
But my point is, the goal it to show that you're allowed to be non-straight and not be like that, rather than blame them for being that way.
So are you saying that feeling sexually drawn to children is OK? Are you saying that we should stop bullying adults in relationships with children by putting them in jail & labeling them sex offenders? I mean we haven't experienced what it is like to fall in love with a child, so how do we know the hardships that come with wanting something that is "unjustly" forbidden & looked down upon?
Does this sound ridiculous to you? I bet it does... as a matter of fact I bet you would be one of the first to proclaim that person was a sick f*** & want him locked up with the key thrown away.
Or another example.... assume you were with a trusted friend's house. You are on there computer & discover they have quite the fetish for beastiality & child porn. Deep down you know they are a good person, but I bet you anything that there fetishs would disgust you to the point you would never look at them the same.
I'm pretty much done anyways... The point is that this isn't an attack on Hassat Hunter, but so much the logic that being discriminated against for a fetish (& thats the key word there) that should stay behind closed doors anyways is ridiculous. I'm sure everybody has a fetish they find utterly disgusting (be it child porn, beastiality, golden showers, Scat, etc...) & given the platform will talk negatively about it. Hence why all fetishs should stay BEHIND CLOSED DOORS
Is being sexually attracted to children a crime? No. Is raping them a crime? Yes. Is looking at drawn porn of them a crime? No. Is looking a porn that involved actual children a crime? Yes.
If tomorrow I was suddenly sexually attracted to children, I would freak out as 99% of pedophiles do. You know, the ones who don't happen to also be rapists, yet are still put in the exact same category even if they never, in their entire life, harm a child in any way.
Now, when we're talking about people who decide to wear an outfit and have consensual sex, why the hell would I mind in any way? It doesn't mean I have to find it arousing or do it myself. Why would it be any of my business what they like to do? Why is it more socially accepted to consensual have sex with someone while pretending to be animals than, say, to cheat on your spouse?
Sure, cheating isn't glorified either, but people tend to be more comprehensive of it. It's more "normal". At least you're not a "freak", a "weirdo". Just someone who thinks it's okay to lie and betray someone you supposedly love.
Anyway, in short, being sexually aroused by something, anything, being sexually attracted to something, anything, is never a crime, no. Acting on it can be. Role-playing it, with the informed consent of everyone involved, certainly isn't, and if it's enough of a release to prevent you from actually doing it, then by all means, do so.
I feel we're losing track here though. The point is, being a furry isn't sexual in itself any more than playing D&D is sexual in itself. Hell, I'm sure there are asexual furries. And it's just ridiculous to associate things like that when they're simply not the same thing.
So are you saying that porn has nothing to do with sex? Porn brings on sexual intentions. And also a quick Google Image search for "furry" brings up porn on the first page.
My post didn't even have the word "rape" in it. Keep your arguments to the contents of my post.
I'm only saying that when you look at porn you can get a sexual urge, which therefore relates it to sex. Sure, Furries in general don't necessarily lead to porn, but it's just that the majority of it is, so we end up referring furries to porn half the time.
Furry porn certainly is sexual: it's porn! But that doesn't mean being a furry is all about sex.
ONE image on the first page was pornographic, meaning that none of the others were. Still more nonsexual stuff than sexual stuff by a very large margin (1 in 23 on my results). And glancing through the next couple pages, they had even less sexual content.
Surely, there is furry porn, but if it was inherently sexual, it seems to me that the images on the first page would all be porn except for one, rather than the other way around.
There is furry porn, there is furry sex, I don't deny that. I'm simply rejecting the "furry = sex" equation. Unless you're also saying "human = sex", but that's untrue too.
I really wanted to state my position on the issue after reading through the thread. I feel that I have done so and explained my position in a clear manner. If anyone has more questions, they should feel absolutely free to PM me about them, but I feel I don't have more to contribute to this discussion, nor do I want to contribute in turning it into something nasty.
Did I say it was? Once again, way to go out of context.
That's why I'm glad that there's people like Avistew who are much more able to present clear, consice points of view, although I'm slightly annoyed that the first negative reply seemed to somehow draw the conclusion that they thought child molestation was ok.
Also Bonefreak, a quick search for anything on google can bring up porn if you aren't careful, and especially if safesearch is off, that doesn't neccessarily make that thing sexual in nature, just that there is things of a sexual nature based on it. I believe the internet refers to it as rule 34?
This conception that "Furries = porn" thing though, where does it stem from? It's true that there's furry porn, and indeed there is a lot of it, however wherever or not there more of it than other fetishes is debatable. It does get a lot of bad press however. Shows like CSI have not been kind to it but then it's rarly kind to anything that isn't awesome cop forensics powers.
Has it just become the standard now to hate on furries? Do people just see the hate that is spouted and decide to join in? I would very much like to know.
I'm assuming this is geared at me. But I'm just assuming. Durp
I have faced bullying all throughout my life for a variety of different reasons. I've hated it. I want to prevent it as much as I can, because I know that its ridiculous. I'm not a furry, but I think its stupid and frankly low of people to make fun of them or assume that they rape animals or whatever which is quite shallow and unlearned of an individual to say. I know some pretty cool furries as friends. Those who make fursuits, especially fursuits of excellent quality, are fountains of knowledge in the craft of costuming. On the flipside, I know furries that say that they're persecuted for what they love. Bullying may range from someone calling them a stupid name to a physical harm. I do not condone this at all, and I feel saddened by the fact that they are the current victim du jour on the internet right now. However, it crosses the line when someone says that the bullying of their hobbies and past times, which will forever be felt by anyone as long as there are two people on the earth, is special and is equivocal to those who have been treated like second class citizens with rights kept far from their reach and murder meeting them for just being born.
I have been demeaned and treated as second class due to my sex. I have managed to escape this path, but the fact will still remain that I will not be paid the same amount as an individual of the opposite sex. Nor if i chose to serve in the military would I be able to fill the same roles. Heck, for other reasons I can't even serve in the military honestly. I can't marry an individual I'm attracted to without moving at least 2000 miles away, and even then the federal law would not recognize it.
That said, I'm so lucky to have been born now, right now rather than 150 years ago, where my parents couldn't have gotten married, I wouldn't have been considered an American citizen, and even if I were I wouldn't be able to vote or work or treated like an equal in at the very least the eyes of the law.
And this is just for being born.
However, I cannot ever compare what I have gone through with the sufferings of those who had gone through that such as those who went through slavery or the holocaust. I just cannot do that. I can't even compare myself to women who are forced into arranged marriages. Because there is no comparison there. I morally cannot manipulate someone's hardship and demean it for my own benefit.
k now that i have that out of the way, im gonna go play my silly games about a cartoon rabbit and dog
http://xkcd.com/305/
Apparently the way I cope with uncomfortable arguments is to post links to semi-relevant xkcd comics.
But, erm, I more or less agree with the ever insightful and well-spoken Avistew. People should be free to do whatever they want as long as they're not hurting anyone. And mocking and attacking other people for having unusual hobbies and fetishes or for being flamboyant or eccentric isn't very nice.
Edit: why its a late reply is cos honistly it only just came to my mind about now Xp
What on earth happened to your Spellcheck in the last 24 hours?
I forgot to use it cos I was in a haste
This is a forum about video games, leave your politics at the door.
I hope the mods close this thread.
You should feel terrible.
or like human animal things it well how they are if you don't like it then don't kept to you shelf and ps this is ironic because I hate wheel all of mankind sad ant it
What?
Anyway, I don't get how a piece of fanart (is it fanart? The link is broken.) can become "Copyright Infringement". Is there like a law where we're not allowed to post drawings of blasphemous hybrid animals on website now?
Well...
wait wat
1) backseat modding yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
2) what's this about intolerance i'm hearing about? against who? from who? what?
3) hating furries is just plain childish.
i think
(I've censored the screenshot).
So, no copyright infrigment, there should be no problem now, this isn't the appropiate place to discuss if you like furries or not.