# Why not just call furry a fetish?



## ChaosKingX (Mar 22, 2011)

Maybe it's just me, but the whole "Furries aren't about sex" trip people are always on about seems a little self-defeating. The more furries sugarcoat the fandom, the more people who are easily squicked out decide to check it out and find out that, whaddayaknow, there's some seriously sick fucks out there. They wind up with even worse views than they started out with. At least calling it a fetish makes it clear that it's not for the squeamish.

Just my two cents.


----------



## Tabasco (Mar 22, 2011)

Better: Why not call furry a fandom like it is, and admit there's a fetish side.


----------



## ChaosKingX (Mar 22, 2011)

Blues said:


> Better: Why not call furry a fandom like it is, and admit there's a fetish side.



That's the thing. Even the non-explicit furry art is still fetishized to a degree, even if it's not all out porn. The distinction is so hard to see sometimes that it might as well not even be there.


----------



## LizardKing (Mar 22, 2011)

Another Den classic right here


----------



## Heliophobic (Mar 22, 2011)

ChaosKingX said:


> Even the non-explicit furry art is still fetishized to a degree


 
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4485528/
o babby so smexy


----------



## Tabasco (Mar 22, 2011)

ChaosKingX said:


> That's the thing. Even the non-explicit furry art is still fetishized to a degree, even if it's not all out porn. The distinction is so hard to see sometimes that it might as well not even be there.


 
This is fetishized? I can see how this might be even though it's not porn, but nah.


----------



## ChaosKingX (Mar 22, 2011)

LizardKing said:


> Another Den classic right here



Just the kind of reaction I expected. Not even putting an argument in, just bullying the newbie because he has a point.


----------



## Vaelarsa (Mar 22, 2011)

OP is a sick fuck that wants more acceptance in the fandom.


----------



## Shiroka (Mar 22, 2011)

trololololol

But seriously, are you trying to tell us anthropomorphism should be called a fetish? Gee, then we really should give Bugs Bunny an R rating.


----------



## ChaosKingX (Mar 22, 2011)

Vaelarsa said:


> OP is a sick fuck that wants more acceptance in the fandom.



Um... no. Not even a bit.

@ Grycho - The bare tits kinda point toward fetish. Just a little.

@ Blues - I didn't say all of it was, but the vast majority is. Everyone with an anthro fursona pretty much designs their fursona to be what they consider attractive, which (like it or not) is fetishizing it. You don't see any ugly fursonas unless those kind of features are a turn-on. All I'm saying.


----------



## Mentova (Mar 22, 2011)

ChaosKingX said:


> Um... no. Not even a bit.
> 
> @ Grycho - The bare tits kinda point toward fetish. Just a little.
> 
> @ Blues - I didn't say all of it was, but the vast majority is. Everyone with an anthro fursona pretty much designs their fursona to be what they consider attractive, which (like it or not) is fetishizing it. You don't see any ugly fursonas unless those kind of features are a turn-on. All I'm saying.



If you can find anything fetishy in my favorites other than a few joke comics making fun of the perverts then I will agree with you.


----------



## ChaosKingX (Mar 22, 2011)

Shiroka said:


> trololololol
> 
> But seriously, are you trying to tell us anthropomorphism should be called a fetish? Gee, then we really should give Bugs Bunny an R rating.



Anthro in general, no. But as a whole, this fandom has a significantly different take on it than most people. Feet aren't inherently sexual, but that doesn't stop some people from having foot fetishes.


----------



## evenmore (Mar 22, 2011)

Generalizations are the easy way out.


----------



## Tabasco (Mar 22, 2011)

ChaosKingX said:


> @ Blues - I didn't say all of it was, but the vast majority is. Everyone with an anthro fursona pretty much designs their fursona to be what they consider attractive, which (like it or not) is fetishizing it. You don't see any ugly fursonas unless those kind of features are a turn-on. All I'm saying.


 
Another good word for it would be "idealism" or "fantasy."


----------



## CannonFodder (Mar 22, 2011)

Blues said:


> Another good word for it would be "idealism" or "fantasy."


 If idealism = sexual fetish like OP suggested then only 18+ would be allowed in the louvre and to view the pictures there would be a coin slot


----------



## ChaosKingX (Mar 22, 2011)

You know what, you guys are right. Just forget I said anything. I just think it's easier to just call it a fetish than play ping-pong with the whole "is it/isn't  sexual" thing. It's obviously sexual to some degree, so just go with that.


----------



## Aden (Mar 22, 2011)

ChaosKingX said:


> You know what, you guys are right. Just forget I said anything. I just think it's easier to just call it a fetish than play ping-pong with the whole "is it/isn't  sexual" thing. It's obviously sexual to some degree, so just go with that.


 
No, it's _easier_ to just call it a hobby or an interest.


----------



## Ixtu (Mar 22, 2011)

Why not just call scifi a fetish? 
Why not just call reality TV a fetish?
Why not just call anime a fetish?
Why not just call art a fetish?
Why not just call Pokemon a fetish?
Why not just call stamp collecting a fetish?


----------



## LizardKing (Mar 22, 2011)

ChaosKingX said:


> Just the kind of reaction I expected. Not even putting an argument in



So near



ChaosKingX said:


> just bullying the newbie because he has a point.



And yet so far


----------



## Blutide (Mar 22, 2011)

ChaosKingX said:


> Maybe it's just me, but the whole "Furries aren't about sex" trip people are always on about seems a little self-defeating. The more furries sugarcoat the fandom, the more people who are easily squicked out decide to check it out and find out that, whaddayaknow, there's some seriously sick fucks out there. They wind up with even worse views than they started out with. At least calling it a fetish makes it clear that it's not for the squeamish.
> 
> Just my two cents.


 Its people like you that keep /b/ spinning.


----------



## Tabasco (Mar 22, 2011)

I'm thinking of a video game. It is a fantastic video game that is not about sex but has a seedy underbelly of smut and a dash of fangirls who never actually played the game, because its players are adults who are horny and free to do what they want on the Internet. Fandom or fetish?


----------



## CannonFodder (Mar 22, 2011)

ChaosKingX said:


> You know what, you guys are right. Just forget I said anything. I just think it's easier to just call it a fetish than play ping-pong with the whole "is it/isn't  sexual" thing. It's obviously sexual to some degree, so just go with that.


 Sexual aspects of the fandom is a subgroup.
To call the fandom a sexual fetish in that parts of a whole do not equal the whole, the fandom is actually a hundred minifandoms with the anthropomorphization in common, claiming that the sex subgroup constitutes the fandom's entirety is no better than how furries fight saying scalies aren't "true" furries.  If it truly was a sexual fetish there would be a normalization effect enforcing sexualization onto members, which the fandom does not, only people highly in the sexual aspect try to force this onto others.  If you were right then EVERYONE would be forcing sex onto others.


----------



## Shiroka (Mar 22, 2011)

Hay guys let's call Renaissance art porn cuz they all got their boobs and dicks hanging out :V


----------



## ChaosKingX (Mar 22, 2011)

Aden said:


> No, it's _easier_ to just call it a hobby or an interest.



But then you're back to square one. Somebody wants to join your little hobby group, they see some creepy guy advertising inflation or vore or something a lot worse, then that colors their perception of it forever. Whereas if somebody's only in it for fap material, chances are they're probably seen or even drawn worse.


----------



## Blutide (Mar 22, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Sexual aspects of the fandom is a subgroup.
> To call the fandom a sexual fetish in that parts of a whole do not equal the whole, the fandom is actually a hundred minifandoms with the anthropomorphization in common, claiming that the sex subgroup constitutes the fandom's entirety is no better than how furries fight saying scalies aren't "true" furries.  If it truly was a sexual fetish there would be a normalization effect enforcing sexualization onto members, which the fandom does not, only people highly in the sexual aspect try to force this onto others.  If you were right then EVERYONE would be forcing sex onto others.


 
I...don't know what to say.

Thank you?


----------



## Aden (Mar 22, 2011)

Should we make a venn diagram


----------



## CannonFodder (Mar 22, 2011)

InsaneNight said:


> I...don't know what to say.
> 
> Thank you?


 The reason why you can't call furry a fetish is because in of itself there is no such thing as furry, furry is subjective.  There are four main subgroups of furries, each of those subgroups has about 10 subgroups, of those sub-sub-groups are subgroups,  these sub-sub-sub groups is where the classification for sexual aspect appears.

tl;dr sex is a sub-sub-subgroup of furry. Saying furry = sex would fuck up the chart to the point it wouldn't make sense.


Aden said:


> Should we make a venn diagram


I'm working on a classification system, it would be easier.


----------



## Monster. (Mar 22, 2011)

ChaosKingX said:


> Just the kind of reaction I expected. Not even putting an argument in, just bullying the newbie because he has a point.


You have a lot to learn if you think you're being bullied, kiddo.

Also, while you have a point, I think CF's post above me ^ pretty much sums up why the fandom itself is not a fetish.


----------



## Deo (Mar 22, 2011)

Y'all are posting in a troll thread.


----------



## LizardKing (Mar 22, 2011)

ChaosKingX said:


> But then you're back to square one. Somebody wants to join your little hobby group, they see some creepy guy advertising inflation or vore or something a lot worse, then that colors their perception of it forever. Whereas if somebody's only in it for fap material, chances are they're probably seen or even drawn worse.


 
So basically, define it by its worst attributes and that way people wont get offended or shocked at a later date. Right.

GTA is all about killing prostitutes
Schindler's list was a film about killing jews 
Watership Down is a story of rabbits getting mauled to death by other rabbits
Oh hey, Monty Python and the Holy Grail is _also_ about killer rabbits

Et fucking cetera

Serious Den post quota exceeded for today - Please try again tomorrow


----------



## CannonFodder (Mar 22, 2011)

Deo said:


> Y'all are posting in a troll thread.


 Yeah I know, just bored.


----------



## Monster. (Mar 22, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> Yeah I know, just bored.


Same here. :[ My head hurts and my food won't cook fast enough.

Gas grills, you have failed me.


----------



## Duality Jack (Mar 22, 2011)

ChaosKingX said:


> That's the thing. Even the non-explicit furry art is still fetishized to a degree, even if it's not all out porn. The distinction is so hard to see sometimes that it might as well not even be there.


 Hahahahaha.

No.

a cute bunny picture is a cute bunny picture.
That is unless you want to have sex with a cute bunny... then you are a terrible person.


----------



## CannonFodder (Mar 22, 2011)

Gaz said:


> Same here. :[ My head hurts and my food won't cook fast enough.
> 
> Gas grills, you have failed me.


 I've been up for 56 hours and I can't go to sleep yet otherwise it'll fuck up my sleep schedule for the rest of the week.
You know you've been up too long if you hallucinate your professors is singing the lecture.


----------



## Monster. (Mar 22, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I've been up for 56 hours and I can't go to sleep yet otherwise it'll fuck up my sleep schedule for the rest of the week.


I hate to derail, but why the fuck have you been up that long. :|


----------



## CannonFodder (Mar 22, 2011)

Gaz said:


> I hate to derail, but why the fuck have you been up that long. :|


 I was up the first night playing minecraft making the entire continent entirely flat and in layers and looked at my clock at it was 7:50 am ten minutes till class, then cause I took a nap during the day I couldn't get to sleep that night and haven't been able to get to sleep.


----------



## Heliophobic (Mar 22, 2011)

ChaosKingX said:


> @ Grycho - The bare tits kinda point toward fetish. Just a little.


 
The artist them self actually said it was a sexy zombie. That was half sarcasm.

Dat torn out eye.


----------



## LizardKing (Mar 22, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> playing minecraft making the entire continent entirely flat and in layers



*cough*


----------



## CannonFodder (Mar 22, 2011)

LizardKing said:


> *cough*


 I know, that's where I got the idea.
...and my ocd kicked in full gear.
Btw how do you get rid of bedrock?


----------



## Darkfoxx (Mar 22, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I know, that's where I got the idea.
> ...and my ocd kicked in full gear.
> Btw how do you get rid of bedrock?


 
You dont. You just fill up the spaces in between till it's perfectly flat.


----------



## Blutide (Mar 22, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> The reason why you can't call furry a fetish  is because in of itself there is no such thing as furry, furry is  subjective.  There are four main subgroups of furries, each of those  subgroups has about 10 subgroups, of those sub-sub-groups are subgroups,   these sub-sub-sub groups is where the classification for sexual aspect  appears.
> 
> tl;dr sex is a sub-sub-subgroup of furry. Saying furry =  sex would fuck up the chart to the point it wouldn't make  sense.


 
I know, I was trying to say thank for explaining it. Goddamn it I am tired, sorry.


CannonFodder said:


> Yeah I know, just bored.


 
 Yup, me too..


----------



## Duality Jack (Mar 22, 2011)

CannonFodder said:


> I know, that's where I got the idea.
> ...and my ocd kicked in full gear.
> Btw how do you get rid of bedrock?


 You can't without modding, and by doing that you can risk breaking threw the ground and into an abyss a game crashing abyss. 

I can't remember the exact mod name but it was a mineral adding mod with more items and whatnot. Look on the Minecraft forums for it.

OR you can fill in the gaps by giving yourself "Adminium" using a inventory editor, and leveling it off.


----------



## PKBitchGirl (Mar 22, 2011)

Blues said:


> I'm thinking of a video game. It is a fantastic video game that is not about sex but has a seedy underbelly of smut and a dash of fangirls who never actually played the game, because its players are adults who are horny and free to do what they want on the Internet. Fandom or fetish?



Mass Effect? Because I know of people who are ga-ga over Garrus from just watching his cut scenes on YouTube and who have never played the game


----------



## Duality Jack (Mar 22, 2011)

PKBitchGirl said:


> Mass Effect? Because I know of people who are ga-ga over Garrus from just watching his cut scenes on YouTube and who have never played the game


 That is called Fan-Fiction with all due respect.


----------



## Waffles (Mar 22, 2011)

Just my two cents:
Fetish implies the WHOLE FANDOM is sex. Hobby includes the sex/yiff/whatever, but also encompasses the clean art, the suits, the everything else.


----------



## Luca (Mar 22, 2011)

Let's call all Muslims, suicide bombing terrorists then. Sure there may be nice Muslims out there but they just try to sugar coat the whole thing. :V


----------



## mystery_penguin (Mar 22, 2011)

And then the entirety of this forum raised their hand, and slammed their palms onto their forehead in disapproval of your blatantly unintelligent proposal.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Mar 22, 2011)

Op you best be trolling.

That said let me tell you a story. It's a story about a tree. It's a big tree. It's a huge Redwood in fact. Used to be a little bitty sapling till a large tree fell down and this one took it's place. Anyway one day the trunk was talking to it's branches. See a fight broke out. Seemed like each one of the branches on this tree wanted to define the entire tree by itself. The trunk kept trying to stress upon the branches that no, the entire tree is not made up of a single branch. The branches are just part of something bigger, one part of the whole.

Now see this thread? You are a branch. The FAFer's explaining why the fandom can't be defined simply by the word "Fetish" they are the trunk. Lets see if you can put 2 and 2 together.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Mar 22, 2011)

ChaosKingX said:


> Maybe it's just me, but the whole "Furries aren't about sex" trip people are always on about seems a little self-defeating. The more furries sugarcoat the fandom, the more people who are easily squicked out decide to check it out and find out that, whaddayaknow, there's some seriously sick fucks out there. They wind up with even worse views than they started out with. At least calling it a fetish makes it clear that it's not for the squeamish.
> 
> Just my two cents.



Because to most sane people furry isn't a fetish, it's a fandom. It has a fetish side to it, but it does not mean furry is a fetish. Noobfail.jpeg


----------



## DanaDragonpaw (Mar 23, 2011)

Ixtu said:


> Why not just call stamp collecting a fetish?


 
HOW DID YOU KNOW?! Stamps are so hawt. <3

In all seriousness though, y'know why not? Because we still have furs like myself and plenty of others that're here for the nice, clean art, among other PG aspects of the fandom.


----------



## Taralack (Mar 23, 2011)

ChaosKingX said:


> Just my two cents.


 
Keep that shit on your Livejournal then, broham.

This topic has been discussed to death in this forum.


----------



## Airborne_Piggy (Mar 23, 2011)

To call furry a fetish is like calling anime a fetish.

If furry was devoted to, and only used as fap material, it could be considered a fetish, but it's not. Furry is on the same level with anime, and I know plenty of non-fetishist/non-yiffy anime and furry artists.


----------



## Xegras (Mar 23, 2011)

Stamp collecting is so much more of a fetish then furry. 

I mean come on dude you lick those things, that's just downright sexual. :V


----------



## Inashne117 (Mar 23, 2011)

Because it's not just a fetish. Not much I could add that hasn't already been said.


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

ITT: Newb seriously confused as to what "fetish" actually means.

furry itself is not a fetish though there are some that have fetishized it (as in, cannot find sexual gratification without incorporating said thing into their sexual fantasies.) hell, i really like furry stuff and some furry porn but honestly? i do not need it to attain sexual gratification.

it's ridiculous to call furry a fetish simply because there are some in the fandom that have fetishized it. that's like saying everyone into anime is into tentacle rape porn.


----------



## Valery91Thunder (Mar 23, 2011)

> Everyone with an anthro fursona pretty much designs their fursona to be what they consider attractive


Bear in mind that there are some people who create their fursona/characters adding things they both like and don't like. This is called "balancing the characters".
The thing you described is called a Mary Sue. No one likes Mary Sues.

In topic: I agree with what everyone else already said.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 23, 2011)

It's no use, OP. I've been trying to tell these guys that furry is a fetish for months and that a fetish doesn't have to be expressed in any sexual kind of way but they just don't get it because they try so desperately to tell themselves that furry is all sunshine and rainbows and bubblegum, which is really much more creepy than just admitting the truth.

I compliment you for having balls and making this thread so I didn't have to, though. :3



Grycho said:


> http://www.furaffinity.net/view/4485528/
> o babby so smexy


You know somebody will be fapping to that. :V



Ixtu said:


> Why not just call scifi a fetish?
> Why not just call reality TV a fetish?
> Why not just call anime a fetish?
> Why not just call art a fetish?
> ...


 Not the same thing, DERP. I don't consider furry a legitimate fandom because as far as I can see most of you guys aren't even fans of any specific kind of literary works or stories or whatever, you're just fixated on the characters that inhabit these stories because they're talking animal people. This fixation over a type of literary device/character/object is really odd and makes just about as much sense as someone obsessing over balloons or whatever. It's fetishism in it's purest form, no matter how "clean" you try to make it look. And that's really okay and nothing to be ashamed about.


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> It's no use, OP. I've been trying to tell these guys that furry is a fetish for months and that a fetish doesn't have to be expressed in any sexual kind of way but they just don't get it because they try so desperately to tell themselves that furry is all sunshine and rainbows and bubblegum, which is really much more creepy than just admitting the truth.
> 
> I compliment you for having balls and making this thread so I didn't have to, though. :3


 
complimenting him for what, exactly? for not being arsed to know what fetish actually means?

here, i'll save you the trouble of having to google it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_fetishism

because if i'm reading this correctly, if furry is a fetish, then all the people that don't sexualize furries (and they are out there, albeit a minority) aren't "true" furries by your logic.

oh, did you mean the non-sexual fetishism?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetishism

this one might fly if all that furry was was a spiritual thing, but then there are those that do not feel any sort of mystical connection with their furry personas... so, they'd not be "true" furries by the same logic.

or did you mean this?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commodity_fetishism

can't be this unless you're talking about the commerce that happens in the fandom.

... seriously, you try so hard to be so edgy and yet you fail miserably. one would think that after so many tries and failing, you'd think that there'd be an iota of common sense to just stop trying. (but we all know you won't...)

so, basically... to TLR this up for you... you are wrong.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 23, 2011)

Redregon said:


> words





> *fetÂ·ish*
> 
> â€‚ â€‚/ËˆfÉ›t
> 
> ...





> fetish  fetÂ·ish (fÄ›t'Ä­sh, fÄ“'tÄ­sh)
> _n. _
> 
> 
> ...


Sauce.


> *Noun*
> 
> *fetish* (_plural_ *fetishes*)
> 
> ...



And yet another source.


Yes, a word can have multiple meanings. I know, it's truly shocking.


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> words


 
so, by that logic, people that are into this merely as a hobby are not "true" furries either? i'm sure that there are people that would disagree with you on this one too... because, for some of us, it's just a hobby. nothing more, nothing less.

keep trying. you'll reach that brass ring sooner or later.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 23, 2011)

Redregon said:


> so, by that logic, people that are into this merely as a hobby are not "true" furries either? i'm sure that there are people that would disagree with you on this one too... because, for some of us, it's just a hobby. nothing more, nothing less.
> 
> keep trying. you'll reach that brass ring sooner or later.


 A "hobby" would imply some kind of activity, and plenty of furries don't really do any kind of activity other than going to furry websites or whatever. To make it a hobby, everyone would have to be fursuit makers or whatever.

And it still doesn't change the fact that you have a bizarre fixation over talking animal people. It's a fetish, bro.


----------



## Trpdwarf (Mar 23, 2011)

I would like to point out that part of the reason why you don't run around calling the furry fandom a fetish is because people auto associate that word with "sexual". Meaning that people...a lot of people in regular society assume that when you speak about fetish's you are talking about sexual things. Now you can play the game of semantics all day but it doesn't change the fact that in the furry fandom fetish tends to mean something sexual. In society people tend to make that auto connection of sex to the word fetish as well. If you run around calling the furry fandom a fetish people just won't get that you are talking in a non sexual sense. So you are better off calling it a hobby or an interest and leave it at that.

It doesn't help matters that often times when people are pushing for others to just "Accept" the fandom as a fetish fandom they tend to mean "sexual fetish" and as such are trying to push the sexual side aspect. Basically they want what they came for to define the whole of the fandom. It's rather selfish really. It's the branch telling the trunk what the tree is, and refusing to come to terms with being just part of a whole. If you run around defining a whole by it's smaller parts people are rarely going to get the bigger picture.

This would be like me trying to push that the fandom is about about fur-suits. Silly idea isn't it? Absurd too.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Mar 23, 2011)

I guess I'm not a true furry, then, if I'm not obsessed by is.

Kellie, why are you so stubbornly holding on to your "Furry is a fetish" standpoint?
Are you trying to justify something to yourself? Are you trying to make furries (or any fandom for that matter) look bad?

You can apply far-fetched definitions of any word to the fandom, but I promise you, most people will not see "Fetish" the way you seem to do.

As long as you don't have a brick wall of a argument, Stop trying to change a stampede's path.

Also: [This] at Trp's post.


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> A "hobby" would imply some kind of activity, and plenty of furries don't really do any kind of activity other than going to furry websites or whatever. To make it a hobby, everyone would have to be fursuit makers or whatever.
> 
> And it still doesn't change the fact that you have a bizarre fixation over talking animal people. It's a fetish, bro.


 
... seriously? that's the best you can do? 

so, let's take your logic one step further... so, are you saying that roleplayers of all stripes (since that's what a lot of people that "obsess" about talking animals typically do) are also in posession of a bizarre fixation?

seriously... i take it back. stop trying. that brass ring is just too damn high for you.



CerbrusNL said:


> Kellie, why are you so stubbornly holding on to your "Furry is a fetish" standpoint?



... well, misery DOES love company. (teehee)


----------



## Xegras (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> A "hobby" would imply some kind of activity, and plenty of furries don't really do any kind of activity other than going to furry websites or whatever. To make it a hobby, everyone would have to be fursuit makers or whatever.


 
Plenty of people would go to cons or get fursuits most just can't afford it. 

So because they can't afford it that makes it a fetish? :V


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 23, 2011)

Trpdwarf said:


> I would like to point out that part of the reason why you don't run around calling the furry fandom a fetish is because people auto associate that word with "sexual". Meaning that people...a lot of people in regular society assume that when you speak about fetish's you are talking about sexual things. Now you can play the game of semantics all day but it doesn't change the fact that in the furry fandom fetish tends to mean something sexual. In society people tend to make that auto connection of sex to the word fetish as well. If you run around calling the furry fandom a fetish people just won't get that you are talking in a non sexual sense. So you are better off calling it a hobby or an interest and leave it at that.
> 
> It doesn't help matters that often times when people are pushing for others to just "Accept" the fandom as a fetish fandom they tend to mean "sexual fetish" and as such are trying to push the sexual side aspect. Basically they want what they came for to define the whole of the fandom. It's rather selfish really. It's the branch telling the trunk what the tree is, and refusing to come to terms with being just part of a whole. If you run around defining a whole by it's smaller parts people are rarely going to get the bigger picture.
> 
> This would be like me trying to push that the fandom is about about fur-suits. Silly idea isn't it? Absurd too.


I will agree that people who try to push for others to accept their (sexual) fetish are pretty stupid and deserve to get smacked upside the head. You don't see this kind of whining and begging for acceptance from other fetish groups or fandoms, so furries really have no right to complain about being oppressed or not accepted enough.

As for people getting the idea that furry is completely sexual when you tell 'em that you're a furry and that it's a fetish... well, you kinda don't have to tell anyone you're a furry. I know from experience that the reason a lot of people hate furries in the first place is because "they can't keep their fetish to themselves" and have to go around and tell everybody that they're a furry on YouTube, Facebook, or anywhere online or offline, really. That's why I only keep my furry-ness on furry websites. No one in the outside world gives really cares or wants to know if I'm a furry or not.



CerbrusNL said:


> I guess I'm not a true furry, then, if I'm not obsessed by is.
> 
> Kellie, why are you so stubbornly holding on to your "Furry is a fetish" standpoint?
> Are you trying to justify something to yourself? Are you trying to make furries (or any fandom for that matter) look bad?
> ...


I'm not really trying to make furries look bad, I'm just telling you to stop being so militant whenever someone suggests that furry is a fetish, and I'm also trying to tell you guys that no, a fetish doesn't automatically have to be sexual.

I admit "obsession" may have been a poor choice on my words, but the fact that you guys take so much enjoyment in drawings, dressing up, or pretending to be animals... yeah, that's fetishism. Oh, and I love how you call my definition "far-fetched" when it really makes a lot of sense and that it's how the general public recognizes us.



Redregon said:


> ... seriously? that's the best you can do?
> 
> so, let's take your logic one step further... so, are you saying that roleplayers of all stripes (since that's what a lot of people that "obsess" about talking animals typically do) are also in posession of a bizarre fixation?
> 
> seriously... i take it back. stop trying. that brass ring is just too damn high for you.


Roleplaying is an activity so no, I wouldn't call it a fetish.


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> I will agree that people who try to push for others to accept their (sexual) fetish are pretty stupid and deserve to get smacked upside the head. You don't see this kind of whining and begging for acceptance from other fetish groups or fandoms, so furries really have no right to complain about being oppressed or not accepted enough.
> 
> As for people getting the idea that furry is completely sexual when you tell 'em that you're a furry and that it's a fetish... well, you kinda don't have to tell anyone you're a furry. I know from experience that the reason a lot of people hate furries in the first place is because "they can't keep their fetish to themselves" and have to go around and tell everybody that they're a furry on YouTube, Facebook, or anywhere online or offline, really. That's why I only keep my furry-ness on furry websites. No one in the outside world gives really cares or wants to know if I'm a furry or not.
> 
> ...


 
QUICK!!! HIDE THE BUNNIES!!! Kellie is Splitting hairs! *hyuk hyuk hyuk*


----------



## TreacleFox (Mar 23, 2011)

It can be sort of, but not always. :I
Lets just call it a hobby. >.>


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 23, 2011)

Redregon said:


> QUICK!!! HIDE THE BUNNIES!!! Kellie is Splitting hairs! *hyuk hyuk hyuk*


How old are you again?



Meadow said:


> It can be sort of, but not always. :I
> Lets just call it a hobby. >.>


 It's either a fetish or it's not, it can't be both.


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> How old are you again?


 
ah, yeah... because i cracked a joke i'm immidiately immature. riiiiiiiight... because having a sense of humour is SO OUTRAGEOUS i should be shot, right?

look, you can call it a fetish all you want but that doesn't make it truth. though, protip... when you're called on it, don't go 'bergin about semantics. it doesn't make you look smrt, it makes you look foolish.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 23, 2011)

Redregon said:


> ah, yeah... because i cracked a joke i'm immidiately immature. riiiiiiiight... *because having a sense of humour is SO OUTRAGEOUS i should be shot, right?*
> 
> look, you can call it a fetish all you want but that doesn't make it truth. though, protip... when you're called on it, don't go 'bergin about semantics. it doesn't make you look smrt, it makes you look foolish.


 You said it, not me.

Oh, and I'm so terribly sorry I'm just teaching you guys that a word can have multiple meanings. :V


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> You said it, not me.
> 
> Oh, and I'm so terribly sorry I'm just teaching you guys that a word can have multiple meanings. :V


 
and yet you're refusing to accept other definitions of a word because it doesn't fit in with your preconcieved idea as to what furry is.

hmm... is that my irony-sense tingling?


----------



## Darkfoxx (Mar 23, 2011)

I dont want to be calling furry anything because it's something different for everyone. But I do want to raise the point that one of the guys from that radio show that snuck into the furry con brought up...

They basically said "If they'd just told me it was a kind of fetish I would have just gone "okay"  and not care much. But if they tell me it's just a group of people enjoy hanging out with eachother in animal costumes, that is a bit weird"

Seems to me that they're saying that they wont give the fandom a second glance if they think it's a fetish thing but they choose to ridicule furries because they (furries) say it's NOT a fetish. 

Whatever it is, if you care about outward appearences (which I personally don't its just a hobby so why would I care?) this might be something to think about.

Again, I dont want to attach any names or meanings to furry. It is what it is to everyone individually, no-one can really say "hey this is what it should be for everyone". It's a hobby. 
I compare it to my RC hobby. A lot of people will look at me enjoying racing my scale model cars and think I'm childish for it. I dont care: I just enjoy my hobby. And how others enjoy their RC hobby is their own choice, there is no-one trying their best to make radio controlled models hobby look less childish because they think that's bad for the community's outward appearence. No-one cares. Insert big fat shrug here.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 23, 2011)

Redregon said:


> and yet you're refusing to accept other definitions of a word because it doesn't fit in with your preconcieved idea as to what furry is.
> 
> hmm... is that my irony-sense tingling?


 I have reasons for it. I don't consider furry a fandom because they'd have to be fans of some kind of works of fictions for it to apply, and not just something you use as a literary device. I don't consider furry a hobby because liking talking animals =/= hobby. To make it a hobby you actually need to do something. A lot of furries don't.


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> I have reasons for it. I don't consider furry a fandom because they'd have to be fans of some kind of works of fictions for it to apply, and not just something you use as a literary device. I don't consider furry a hobby because liking talking animals =/= hobby. To make it a hobby you actually need to do something. A lot of furries don't.


 
... 'Bergin.


----------



## Kiru-kun (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> I have reasons for it. I don't consider furry a fandom because they'd have to be fans of some kind of works of fictions for it to apply, and not just something you use as a literary device. I don't consider furry a hobby because liking talking animals =/= hobby. To make it a hobby you actually need to do something. A lot of furries don't.


 

So now I'm going to ask the stupid question, cause it needs to be asked by someone. Isn't simply the act of these people liking talking animals  constitute them as "Doing something?"


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 23, 2011)

Kiru-kun said:


> So now I'm going to ask the stupid question, cause it needs to be asked by someone. Isn't simply the act of these people liking talking animals  constitute them as "Doing something?"


 No. I'm talking about real activities. Building fursuits can be considered a hobby, and maybe drawing too.


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> No. I'm talking about real activities. Building fursuits can be considered a hobby, and maybe drawing too.


 
oh, you mean things like attending social events like conventions, local meetups, bowling, poker-nights, parties, art-jams, luncheons, etc...?


----------



## Kiru-kun (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie, let me act you this.

I enjoy watching people Test and play video game. I also enjoy watching watching the process. watching coders code, watching Modelers Model, and watching riggers rig. Yet I do not contribute in anyway to the game designing process.

Can you sit there and tell me, that just because I don't contribute to the game design process, means I don't  make hobby and interest in the game design process.


----------



## Darkfoxx (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> I have reasons for it. I don't consider furry a fandom because they'd have to be fans of some kind of works of fictions for it to apply, and not just something you use as a literary device. I don't consider furry a hobby because liking talking animals =/= hobby. To make it a hobby you actually need to do something. A lot of furries don't.


 
That's your personal take on what furry is. To many others, it is indeed a fandom, as they are fans of antrhopomorphic animals in art and literature. Even if it's just a literary device it still counts. For instance, if a gathering of fans of anthro animals is not to be concidered a fandom, then there exists no Star Trek fandom or no anime fandom or no Lion King fandom.

To many it is indeed a hobby as they actually do something. Like draw, write, sculpt, make fursuits, discuss it on forums.

Yes, even discussing on forums counts as 'doing something'.

Whatever it is apart from a hobby or what they are fans of, is a personal thing. The rest is just something people staple or superglue on. Or even attach with rubber bands or pieces of string. Fandoms and hobbies even overlap, like furry-manga-sci-fi that I like. Which is three fandoms combined. Or the fact that in my ideal model train layout I'd like to have part of city 17 with model striders in the streets and a huge citadel in the background. Combining my model building, trains and gaming hobbies.

There is no set of rules that specify what furry is or is about, other then what all furry fans or furries or whatever you want to call the people enjoying anthro animals have in common, which is simply the anthro animals and a liking for them. That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

I understand what you're trying to say, that it would maybe be even better for outward appearences to just say "hey, yeah, it is a fetish, so what?" instead of sugarcoating it as something not at all adult and squeaky clean as that seems to be counterproductive. 
A lot of people that I spoke to who dislike furries dont really dislike them for what they enjoy or how they are, they seem to dislike the fact that furries in general are denying the sexy side of furry fandom high and low despite the massive amounts of porn. (aside from the fact that they say furries post their porn everywhere instead of keeping it on furry sites, but that's a whole different matter)

But I dont think it will help much at all trying to define the fandom in either way, PG13 or a fetish. Simply because you can't define it, as it's something different for everyone. The definition simply varies too much.


----------



## Fenneckfan14 (Mar 23, 2011)

Personaly, I see furry fandom and furry fetish's as two different entities. They have a shared general concept, but they aim towards different goals.


----------



## Art Vulpine (Mar 23, 2011)

The problem I always see with the furry fandom is that there is the reality of the fandom and the sterotype of the fandom. 

The stereotype says that the fandom is one big fetish while the truth is that while there are fetish parts of it just like in any fandom, it is not an all or nothing game. There are furries, like me, who are not into the whole fetish thing. 

Another problem I see that is playing out is the question: What makes a fandom? Some say it is having a common interest like Star Wars or RC Airplanes, or Origami. Others say that it is not a fandom unless there is something to do. I'd say the furry fandom covers both. There is a common interest (furries) and has hobbies within (art, stories, roleplaying, fursuits, conventions, bowling parties, etc.)


----------



## arcticsilver (Mar 23, 2011)

Blues said:


> Better: Why not call furry a fandom like it is, and admit there's a fetish side.



Like some fandoms out there also.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 23, 2011)

Redregon said:


> oh, you mean things like attending social events like conventions, local meetups, bowling, poker-nights, parties, art-jams, luncheons, etc...?


Not all furries do those things, you know.



Kiru-kun said:


> Kellie, let me act you this.
> 
> I enjoy watching people Test and play video game. I also enjoy watching watching the process. watching coders code, watching Modelers Model, and watching riggers rig. Yet I do not contribute in anyway to the game designing process.
> 
> Can you sit there and tell me, that just because I don't contribute to the game design process, means I don't  make hobby and interest in the game design process.


 That depends. If you have no desire to partake in such activities yourself, then I don't think I'd want to call it a hobby. When I think "hobby" I think of constructive activities.



darkfoxx said:


> That's your personal take on what furry is. To many others, it is indeed a fandom, as they are fans of antrhopomorphic animals in art and literature. Even if it's just a literary device it still counts. For instance, if a gathering of fans of anthro animals is not to be concidered a fandom, then there exists no Star Trek fandom or no anime fandom or no Lion King fandom.
> 
> To many it is indeed a hobby as they actually do something. Like draw, write, sculpt, make fursuits, discuss it on forums.
> 
> Yes, even discussing on forums counts as 'doing something'.


I don't believe in personal takes. The fandom needs a clear definition because right now it's a massive clusterfuck where no one can decide what makes you a furry and what doesn't, which means that people who aren't welcome into the fandom (zoophiles and such) can easily just walk in and make themselves comfortable here.

Being a fan of Star Trek or Lion King is not the same thing, by the way. Those are established works of fiction with their respective fandoms. Being a fan of anthropomorphic animals is not the same thing because you're obsessing over plot device. It makes just as much sense as making a fandom out of stories where the main characters are orphans or have amnesia. That's why I will not call furry a fandom at this point. Sure, I'm actually a fan of cartoons, but I keep that and my fetish as two entirely separate things.


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> Not all furries do those things, you know.


 
okay... then IRC, Forums, SecondLife, surfing the internet, etc... if they're not active in the community and they're not taking part in any online activities, i think it's safe to say that they've either distanced themselves from the fandom well enough or they just don't care... so, they don't matter. (and really, if they're not active online, not social and doing nothing of value, they must be pretty pathetic so really, we're better off not counting them amongst the fandom's participants.)

though, when all is said and done, how you choose to view the fandom is perfectly fine however you do it. but, don't think for one second that your view of the fandom is how it is. it's only how YOU view the fandom and as has been proven already, your view is not the standard nor is it shared so i sincerely hope that you never, ever try to be an ambassador for the fandom... 

besides, how you view the fandom (which, at the very core is an interest, to whatever degree, in anthropomorphic animals) is your own and not mine.

(and shit, i haven't seen such impressive mental gymnastics since the last Rakeun/ShayFeral thread. congratz.)


----------



## Threetails (Mar 23, 2011)

I think it's kind of stupid the way certain furs outwardly deny the sexual aspect, and play "stone the sinner" when someone talks about it openly. *cough*  CHEWFOX *cough*

It's not _just_ a fetish, I know a number of furs who are solidly asexual, but the fetish aspect is there, and it's prominent.

I think I'd describe furry as a meta-subculture because it's a broad label for dozens of cliques that overlap.


----------



## Maisuki (Mar 23, 2011)

So, by Kellie's logic (if fallacies can be considered as such), even though I play video games, visit forums for said games, and enjoy artwork of the games, I cannot call it a hobby. In the end, I did nothing consecutive with my time. So, simply because there is no physical product from playing video games, it's not a hobby. Consequentially, there is a large amount of suggestive art when it comes to video games, so I suppose video games are a fetish instead?


TL;DR: The real issue here is not one of defining "fetish" but one of how to define a hobby.


----------



## ShadowEon (Mar 23, 2011)

Beatrix Potter had fetish-related art/stories because it was anthro?:3c And uh guys,the furry fandom is a hobby unless you are an otherkin,then you just have a strange lifestyle. Anime can have a lot of sex related things in it too...so that means anyone who likes anime has a fetish?

I must have quite the variety of fetishes then.


----------



## Zanzi (Mar 23, 2011)

If furry was nothing but a fetish, then This, this,  and this would be considered porn/fap material. Yeah... I think you're wrong there, OP.


----------



## Delta (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie this has more to do with what YOU consider a hobby than anything else.
You think a hobby is only an interest in which someone is physically proactive.

According multiple dictionary sites; you need to need to look up the definition:

hobÂ·by â€‚
[hob-ee]  Show IPA
â€“noun, plural -bies.
1.
an activity *or interest* pursued for pleasure or relaxation and not as a main occupation.

Furry is a hobby. Its an interest that people pursue for fun. The medium they the use pursue the interest is irrelevant.

Also,
OP don't be a fucking moron.


----------



## Darkfoxx (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> I don't believe in personal takes. The fandom needs a clear definition -



It has a clear definition. It's about anthro animals in art and literature (etc). It does not need any other clear definitions because that wont help; 



Kellie Gator said:


> because right now it's a massive clusterfuck where no one can decide what makes you a furry and what doesn't,



The only one who can decide if they are a furry or not is the person themselves. Simply by regarding themselves as such. Or not. And that is a good thing.



Kellie Gator said:


> which means that people who aren't welcome into the fandom (zoophiles and such) can easily just walk in and make themselves comfortable here.



Here's where the clearer definitions wont be of any help. Who gets to decide who is and is not allowed to be a furry? Should there be a committee elected by voting? Who will get to vote and who wont? How will it be enforced? If it's decided that zoophile X isnt allowed to 'be' a furry, how will this be enforced? Track him or her down and give them a beating if they dare to call themselves a furry against the will of the mighty Furry Overlord Committee?

Hypothetically, I _could_ say (for the sake of argument), that people who think they can decide on who 'gets to be a furry' like you're kind of doing here, dont get to be a furry. For my own reasons (mainly because it's stupid and no-one has the right to decide about others). 
So what would you do then? Stop being a furry because I said so? Probably not, you'd probably just think I'm some sort of idiot and just enjoy the fandom in your own way like you have done so far.
So what makes you think that others (who you concider 'unwelcome') would respond any differently when told they are not allowed to be a furry?

Of course I dont have any illusions that I have anything in the slightest to say about anyone but myself, so I wont tell people that they're unwelcome.

Not that it matters at all who is all calling themselves a furry or not, it doesn't really matter because it's just a fandom. A hobby.

EDIT: I collect retro computer stuff. At the moment I'm still missing an original gameboy and an N64 among others. But I dont do anything constructive with them, I just collect them. OMG it's not a hobby because Kellie said so! whatever shall I doooo~! :V
Like you I'm a fan of cartoons. Especially talking animals in them. But, a collective of fans can certainly not be called a fandom because it's a mere plot device, can it? Like, zomg. :V


----------



## Spatel (Mar 23, 2011)

Zanzi said:


> If furry was nothing but a fetish, then This, this,  and this would be considered porn/fap material. Yeah... I think you're wrong there, OP.



Uh... all of those are porn/fap material. Especially the first one. Anything anthro is attractive to furry fetishists, not just the explicit stuff.



Airborne_Piggy said:


> To call furry a fetish is like calling anime a fetish.
> 
> If furry was devoted to, and only used as fap material, it could be considered a fetish, but it's not. Furry is on the same level with anime, and I know plenty of non-fetishist/non-yiffy anime and furry artists.



There is an anime fetish.

Anime is a MUCH BROADER graphic medium. It has a mainstream community that extends far beyond the fetishists. The number of self-declared anthro fans that aren't furry fetishists is much smaller. For the most part it is devoted to fap material right now. There's a reason dirty/sexy stuff gets the pageviews. 



Redregon said:


> so, by that logic, people that are into this merely as a hobby are not "true" furries either? i'm sure that there are people that would disagree with you on this one too... because, for some of us, it's just a hobby. nothing more, nothing less.
> 
> keep trying. you'll reach that brass ring sooner or later.



I think drawing and appreciating anthro art as a genre makes someone an anthro artist, or an anthro fan. A lot of Den posters are simply anthro fans trying to steal someone else's name.  

You can't say the people that animated Bugs Bunny or Woody Woodpecker were furries. They're anthro artists that don't consider themselves furries and wouldn't dare associate with furries.

Furries are the ones that have a fetish for it. There's a reason 'yiff' and 'murr' are considered furry language. It's an inseparable part of what furry is. That's a major part of how the subculture got started. It's a major reason people go to the meets. Saying that it's a minority or an insignificant part of the community is revisionism.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 23, 2011)

Zanzi said:


> If furry was nothing but a fetish, then This, this,  and this would be considered porn/fap material. Yeah... I think you're wrong there, OP.


Learn the meaning of the word before you post, durp.



Winds said:


> Kellie this has more to do with what YOU consider a hobby than anything else.
> You think a hobby is only an interest in which someone is physically proactive.
> 
> According multiple dictionary sites; you need to need to look up the definition:
> ...


 When I was a kid people kept telling me stop playing videogames, go outside and "get a real hobby". I guess those words have stuck with me through the years and that's why I do not consider sitting in front of a computer and dicking around on internet message boards a hobby.



darkfoxx said:


> It has a clear definition. It's about anthro animals in art and literature (etc). It does not need any other clear definitions because that wont help;
> 
> 
> The only one who can decide if they are a furry or not is the person themselves. Simply by regarding themselves as such. Or not. And that is a good thing.


Your "definition" was vague at best, and that's my point. The lack of a clear definition set in stone is a big reason for why the fandom is going through so many problems right now. I also believe that your actions should define who you are, and not mere words. You're  not a fan of Star Trek "just because you consider yourself as one" you're a fan of Star Trek because you watch and like Star Trek.




darkfoxx said:


> Here's where the clearer definitions wont be of any help. Who gets to decide who is and is not allowed to be a furry? Should there be a committee elected by voting? Who will get to vote and who wont? How will it be enforced? If it's decided that zoophile X isnt allowed to 'be' a furry, how will this be enforced? Track him or her down and give them a beating if they dare to call themselves a furry against the will of the mighty Furry Overlord Committee?
> 
> Hypothetically, I _could_ say (for the sake of argument), that people who think they can decide on who 'gets to be a furry' like you're kind of doing here, dont get to be a furry. For my own reasons (mainly because it's stupid and no-one has the right to decide about others).
> So what would you do then? Stop being a furry because I said so? Probably not, you'd probably just think I'm some sort of idiot and just enjoy the fandom in your own way like you have done so far.
> ...


This isn't about telling some furries that they're welcome, this is about giving the fandom a clear definition so that people can know from the start if they're welcome or not. Most furries hate zoophiles to the point where they want to beat the shit out of them, but how are the zoophiles supposed to know this right away when the fandom lacks a clear definition and there's about a few million pictures that would suggest that furry is indeed a free haven for dogfuckers?



darkfoxx said:


> EDIT: I collect retro computer stuff. At the moment I'm still missing an original gameboy and an N64 among others. But I dont do anything constructive with them, I just collect them. OMG it's not a hobby because Kellie said so! whatever shall I doooo~! :V
> Like you I'm a fan of cartoons. Especially talking animals in them. But, a collective of fans can certainly not be called a fandom because it's a mere plot device, can it? Like, zomg. :V


Collecting can be considered a hobby, so you got me there.

And finally, if you like the cartoons themselves you're probably an animation/cartoon fan, but if you're being fixated on the kind of human/animal hybrids you see in some cartoons like furries are, I'd definitely call it fetishism. And to avoid any misunderstanding, you can be a fan of Bugs Bunny without being a furry, but you can't be a fan of anthropomorphic animals in general without being a furry.


----------



## Spatel (Mar 23, 2011)

I just like drawing bondage art.

There's clearly nothing sexual about it. It's totally a hobby. The people that get off on this must be some sick fucks. :V


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> Learn the meaning of the word before you post, durp.


 
... here we go again.  *facepalms*


----------



## Ozriel (Mar 23, 2011)

Oh look....another one of these threads.
The den at it's finest.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Mar 23, 2011)

Why do people in this fandom have to split hairs all the time?

The bottom line is, furry is a fandom with fetish aspects.


----------



## Ozriel (Mar 23, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> Why do people in this fandom have to split hairs all the time?
> 
> The bottom line is, furry is a fandom with fetish aspects.


 

It's just like a political debate, except with more rage and agnst.  IMO, it's only a fetish to those who live it as a fetish lifestyle. Other than that, it's just another fandom with cartoon porn in it. :V


----------



## Spatel (Mar 23, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> Why do people in this fandom have to split hairs all the time?
> 
> The bottom line is, furry is a fandom with fetish aspects.


 
Aspects such as everything about it.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 23, 2011)

hey guise wearing diapers when you're an adult is just a fetish to those who live it as a fetish lifestyle :V


----------



## Ozriel (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> hey guise wearing diapers when you're an adult is just a fetish to those who live it as a fetish lifestyle :V


 
Someone's a little hostile. :V


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 23, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Someone's a little hostile. :V


 No hostility intended, just trying to open everyone's eyes. <3


----------



## Ozriel (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> No hostility intended, just trying to open everyone's eyes. <3


 
Yelling and beating people with a tire iron works wonders for that...for about 5 minutes. :V


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 23, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Yelling and beating people with a tire iron works wonders for that...for about 5 minutes. :V


 Oh please. You know I'd never do that because I'm smart enough to keep as far away from furry conventions as humanly possible. :3


----------



## Delta (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> When I was a kid people kept telling me stop playing videogames, go outside and "get a real hobby". I guess those words have stuck with me through the years and that's why I do not consider sitting in front of a computer and dicking around on internet message boards a hobby.



So because of a predisposed ideal you had inserted into your mind at a young age, the definition of "hobby" is now changed and in thus furry must be a fetish because according to what you were taught it doesn't fit the description?

Once....just once, Kellie. I wish you would pull your head out of your ass and stop running on false logic to keep fighting your battles.
You've lost, you've run yourself into a wall.

If it were me, your desperate attempts to stay in the argument by splitting hairs and hoping people get so frustrated that they just give up would be considered trolling and I would infract you for every corresponding post.
This is probably why I'm not a mod.


----------



## MendedEmber (Mar 23, 2011)

Divide the fandom into 2 entities. The fetish, and the hobby. Give the hobby a new name for it to start fresh. Now the problem with that would be coming up with another rediculous name.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 23, 2011)

Winds said:


> So because of a predisposed ideal you had inserted into your mind at a young age, the definition of "hobby" is now changed and in thus furry must be a fetish because according to what you were taught it doesn't fit the description?
> 
> Once....just once, Kellie. I wish you would pull your head out of your ass and stop running on false logic to keep fighting your battles.
> You've lost, you've run yourself into a wall.
> ...


 I'll admit that perhaps my definition of the word "hobby" was somewhat inaccurate, but furry is still strictly a fetish in my book because it's still a mindless, nonsensical fixation that you guys are having.

EDIT:
The people who told me to get a real hobby were right, though. You should all do that.


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> I'll admit that perhaps my definition of the word "hobby" was somewhat inaccurate, but furry is still strictly a fetish* in my book* because it's still a mindless, nonsensical fixation that you guys are having..



there... it's been said... your opinion of the fandom is (as you admit) merely your personal opinion. it is not the accepted standard, nor is it the commonly accepted definition of the fandom.



Kellie Gator said:


> EDIT:
> The people who told me to get a real hobby were right, though. You should all do that.


 
... said the furry...


----------



## Delta (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> I'll admit that perhaps my definition of the word "hobby" was somewhat inaccurate, but furry is still strictly a fetish in my book because it's still a mindless, nonsensical fixation that you guys are having.
> 
> EDIT:
> The people who told me to get a real hobby were right, though. You should all do that.


And now you've resorted to unveiled trolling, I guess thats my queue.


----------



## Spatel (Mar 23, 2011)

MendedEmber said:


> Divide the fandom into 2 entities. The fetish, and the hobby. Give the hobby a new name for it to start fresh. Now the problem with that would be coming up with another rediculous name.


 I actually like this idea, but the hobby community would be very small. Like... just a handful of FaF regulars.


----------



## Tanooki00 (Mar 23, 2011)

Okay, here's a point: just because Playboy contains porn, does that make reading magazines a fetish? Does that even make reading "men's" magazines a fetish? Yes, these magazines contain adult material, and often enough, some fetish material. But the magazines themselves are not automatically part of any given fetish.
Similarly, the "fap material" in the furry fandom is part of the "fetishistic aspect" of the fandom. However, one should not infer that, simply because of the existence of these materials, that the fandom as a whole, is automatically a fetish. If anything, the various printed materials could even be considered a "genre" (or sub-genre, perhaps). But certainly not a fetish. Jeez!


----------



## MendedEmber (Mar 23, 2011)

Spatel said:


> I actually like this idea, but the hobby community would be very small. Like... just a handful of FaF regulars.


 
You say that as if that would be a bad thing.


----------



## Spatel (Mar 23, 2011)

Tanooki00 said:


> Okay, here's a point: just because Playboy contains porn, does that make reading magazines a fetish? Does that even make reading "men's" magazines a fetish? Yes, these magazines contain adult material, and often enough, some fetish material. But the magazines themselves are not automatically part of any given fetish.
> Similarly, the "fap material" in the furry fandom is part of the "fetishistic aspect" of the fandom. However, one should not infer that, simply because of the existence of these materials, that the fandom as a whole, is automatically a fetish. If anything, the various printed materials could even be considered a "genre" (or sub-genre, perhaps). But certainly not a fetish. Jeez!



You can't have a fetish for normal porn. There's a reason it's just called 'porn' and not 'furry porn' or 'bondage porn' or 'midget porn'.


----------



## Aden (Mar 23, 2011)

Redregon said:


> ... said the furry *person arguing in a lengthy fashion about the classification of a silly fandom on the internet*...


 
fixt


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Mar 23, 2011)

Spatel said:


> Aspects such as everything about it.



Wrong.



Spatel said:


> You can't have a fetish for normal porn. There's a reason it's just called 'porn' and not 'furry porn' or 'bondage porn' or 'midget porn'.



Furry porn in itself is not normal porn and therefor can be classed as a fetish.


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

Spatel said:


> You can't have a fetish for normal porn. There's a reason it's just called 'porn' and not 'furry porn' or 'bondage porn' or 'midget porn'.


 
aah, that clears things up.

so, by your logic i guess homosexuality is merely a fetish then since there is gay-porn... because it's that extra word that makes it fall under "fetish" territory.


----------



## Ozriel (Mar 23, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> Oh please. You know I'd never do that because I'm smart enough to keep as far away from furry conventions as humanly possible. :3


 
I should cound myself lucky that most furry porn enthusiasts count me as a "prude" and "Not a real furry" at conventions...which prevent me from sometimes talking about other things besides porn. :V



Redregon said:


> aah, that clears things up.
> 
> so, by your logic i guess homosexuality is merely a fetish then since there is gay-porn... because it's that extra word that makes it fall under "fetish" territory.


 
If that logic were gold nuggets, I'd be arrested for counterfeiting.


----------



## Spatel (Mar 23, 2011)

Redregon said:


> aah, that clears things up.
> 
> so, by your logic i guess homosexuality is merely a fetish then since there is gay-porn... because it's that extra word that makes it fall under "fetish" territory.


 
it's not an extra word though. gay porn, straight porn. same number of words.

gay furry porn -> one extra word


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

Spatel said:


> it's not an extra word though. gay porn, straight porn. same number of words.
> 
> gay furry porn -> one extra word


 
that's not what you said above...



Spatel said:


> You can't have a fetish for normal porn. There's a reason it's just called 'porn' and not 'furry porn' or 'bondage porn' or 'midget porn'.


 
so... are you backpeddling or are you just naturally this dense?


----------



## Blutide (Mar 23, 2011)

Winds said:


> Also,
> OP don't be a fucking moron.


 
Its too late, the thread was made and the world poorer for it.


----------



## Ozriel (Mar 23, 2011)

InsaneNight said:


> Its too late, the thread was made and the world poorer for it.


 
Well FA was due for a thread like this. 
It's like a rubix cube.


----------



## Catilda Lily (Mar 23, 2011)

I don't think of it as a fetish. It is just a hobby.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Mar 23, 2011)

Redregon said:


> that's not what you said above...
> 
> 
> 
> so... are you backpeddling or are you just naturally this dense?



He's definitely not the sharpest knife in the draw.


----------



## Spatel (Mar 23, 2011)

Redregon said:


> so... are you backpeddling or are you just naturally this dense?


 I'm not offering a serious rebuttal because your argument wasn't serious in the first place. At least for your sake I hope it wasn't.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Mar 23, 2011)

Spatel said:


> I'm not offering a serious rebuttal because your argument wasn't serious in the first place. At least for your sake I hope it wasn't.



You haven't offered any kind of rebuttal, even to serious debaters.


----------



## Redregon (Mar 23, 2011)

Spatel said:


> I'm not offering a serious rebuttal because your argument wasn't serious in the first place. At least for your sake I hope it wasn't.


 
translation: "shit, you caught me... welp, better pretend to take the 'moral high ground' so i can at least make a lame-assed attempt to save face, even though i know i don't have much (if any) left to save."

edit:: it would help your argument if you were to offer something of substance instead of being so damn transparent.


----------



## Spatel (Mar 23, 2011)

Redregon said:


> it would help your argument if you were to offer something of substance instead of being so damn transparent.



It's a transparent argument because it's an easy argument that writes itself. 

You can't call "being a Furry" a hobby. Being a member of any community is not the same as having a hobby. Drawing furry art, building fursuits... those are hobbies. There are hundreds of different "furry-related" hobbies someone can have.

You can't say "having an interest in anthropomorphic animals"--the definition you used earlier--is the definition of furry. That makes you an anthro fan. Nothing more. As I said in a previous post: the artists at Disney and Warner Bros Studios are not furries. They're just artists that happen to work in the anthro genre sometimes. It's not furry art. It's anthro art.

Being a Furry means being part of a subculture with very different attitudes toward sex, religion, politics, and human interaction in general compared to standard culture. The sexual aspects of the fandom are what define it and set it apart from other fandoms. It's a huge part of why furries are interesting.

http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/The_Sociology_of_Furry_Fandom,_a_Subculture_Study

Forget that 20% of furries are gay. I don't know how 50% of furries are bisexual, but that's a huge statistical anomaly. It's so much greater than the typical 1-5% for the population it should be worth investigating a lot more. It heavily suggests furries are part of a shared sexual minority of some sort. It only makes sense when you admit there's a fetishistic aspect at the core of the fandom that causes human sexuality to be more robust and experimental than it would be in a typical member of the population.


----------



## Tabasco (Mar 23, 2011)

Lawdy, this is still going?


----------



## Ozriel (Mar 23, 2011)

Spatel said:


> It's a transparent argument because it's an easy argument that writes itself.
> 
> You can't call "being a Furry" a hobby. Being a member of any community is not the same as having a hobby. Drawing furry art, building fursuits... those are hobbies. There are hundreds of different "furry-related" hobbies someone can have.
> 
> ...


 
So...being a furry, even if you do not engage in the sexual aspect still makes you a randy sex freak.
I like that logic. :V

EDIT: Also the statistics are outdated, it would be better if you found another survey with more up-to-date results.


----------



## Blutide (Mar 23, 2011)

Blues said:


> Lawdy, this is still going?


 Its faf, I have been here actively for a month and this is what I got from it:

1 expect stupid posts
2 expect stupid things to continue.....forever
3 expect trolls
4 when you think logic will come and save the day.....expect anger...if not out of control rage.

bah, just an outsiders opinion.....but then again looking inside the faf adventure thread....I was right.


----------



## stevegallacci (Mar 23, 2011)

As others have no doubt noted, defining "furry" itself can be an elusive task. Especially as it can and has been used awfully expansively to include even casual fans of other-than-superhero comics and classic cartoons. And even among intense fandom-as-a-way-of-life types of several flavors, sexualizing the subject might not be a factor. So furry as fetish remains a sub-set of the fandom, until a better term for that sub-set arises.


----------



## Spatel (Mar 23, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> So...being a furry, even if you do not engage in the sexual aspect still makes you a randy sex freak.
> I like that logic. :V
> 
> EDIT: Also the statistics are outdated, it would be better if you found another survey with more up-to-date results.


 
Being a furry makes you a freak regardless of the amount of randy sexual engagements you have, which is very little if you're most furries. Being a freak is a good thing though. Embrace it.

http://www.klisoura.com/ot_furrysurvey.php
You're right the statistics changed. Closer to 30% bi now. Still absurdly high compared to the general population, and it does shoot up to 60 if you include the 'mostly' categories.


----------



## Shiroka (Mar 24, 2011)

Spatel said:


> Being a furry makes you a freak regardless of the amount of randy sexual engagements you have, which is very little if you're most furries. Being a freak is a good thing though. Embrace it.
> 
> http://www.klisoura.com/ot_furrysurvey.php
> You're right the statistics changed. Closer to 30% bi now. Still absurdly high compared to the general population, and it does shoot up to 60 if you include the 'mostly' categories.


 
Also I find it funny how there are more zoophiles in the fandom (14.55%) than there are LGTB's in the general population =P


----------



## RedSavage (Mar 24, 2011)

Successful troll was successful.


----------



## Verin Asper (Mar 24, 2011)

Shiroka said:


> Also I find it funny how there are more zoophiles in the fandom (14.55%) than there are LGTB's in the general population =P


 the idola clan is sorry for fucking up that survey...we also say "you guys deserve it for being easy"


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 24, 2011)

Redregon said:


> there... it's been said... your opinion of the  fandom is (as you admit) merely your personal opinion. it is not the  accepted standard, nor is it the commonly accepted definition of the  fandom.


I never said it was my personal opinion, I only said what it is I'm  seeing. A fetish club that is so much in denial that they'll fuck over  the English language to save their own asses.



Redregon said:


> ... said the furry...


 I don't really call myself a furry anymore because fuck it, if you guys can't make up your minds about what a furry is then how the hell am I supposed to know?



Winds said:


> And now you've resorted to unveiled trolling, I guess thats my queue.


 I don't really consider what I do trolling. I just speak my mind and have a laugh when people can't stand the thought that they just might be wrong about something.


----------



## Redregon (Mar 24, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> I never said it was my personal opinion, I only said what it is I'm  seeing. A fetish club that is so much in denial that they'll fuck over  the English language to save their own asses.



really?! because your insistence on hammering it into our skulls that we're all perverts seems to contradict what you're saying right now. hmm... so, are you being facetious or are you just too high to remember what you've been posting? though i do find it very interesting... if all that you're seeing is the perverted side of the fandom and if you're not able to see the non-perverted side, what does that say about your personal habits when it comes to surfing furry sites? hmmm... because the non-perverted side is there if you're willing to look for it (which you seem unwilling to do... so, tell me... are you in it for the porn only? if so, that does make some sort of sick sense why you'd be constantly trying to hammer into us that it's "only perversion" since, well, if you can convince people that it is, maybe you won't feel so lonely in your own perversion.)

so, to translate... ITT: perverts projecting their sickery onto others to feel "awwright" about their own perversions.



Kellie Gator said:


> I don't really call myself a furry anymore because fuck it, if you guys can't make up your minds about what a furry is then how the hell am I supposed to know?



sorry, you're failing and digging yourself deeper here. just stop it. you aren't winning any points and we're all now dumber for having to read your innane posts on the subject.

like i said before... 'Bergin.


----------



## CerbrusNL (Mar 24, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> I just speak my mind and have a laugh when people can't stand the thought that they just might be wrong about something.


 
Guess what? The feeling's mutual.

Heaven forbid you're actually wrong, instead of the majority of posters in this thread.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 24, 2011)

Redregon said:


> really?! because your insistence on hammering it into our skulls that we're all perverts


And that's where I stopped reading because you haven't listened to a single word I've said.



CerbrusNL said:


> Guess what? The feeling's mutual.
> 
> Heaven forbid you're actually wrong, instead of the majority of posters in this thread.


 Apparently you haven't read my posts either, I admitted to being wrong about my definition on what a hobby is. :V


----------



## Ozriel (Mar 24, 2011)

Spatel said:


> Being a furry makes you a freak regardless of the amount of randy sexual engagements you have, which is very little if you're most furries. Being a freak is a good thing though. Embrace it.



Watch your comformation bias.
Just because it is a fetish for you, or a sexual deviancy fandom for you doesn't mean it is the same for everyone else. 
If you tell people who do not know what a furry is that they are sexual deviants by default, then you are pushing your bias onto them. Other than that, no one has to accept your "Conformation bais" just because you and your friends says it is.  If it is a fetish for you, well that's you. If the sexual aspects are secondary while looking at and making things is primary for everyone else, that's them. It's a hobby. The sexual side is tolerable and just a branch of the furrydom tree. It doesn't make the fandom as a whole. The only reason it stands out is because people like you tell people that it is a fandom of "Dog penises fucking human vaginas" through media or any other outlet when presenting it to an audience who doesn't even know what the hell a furry is. 

The reason why you and others will label it, because unlike other fandoms, Furry does not sweep their dirty things under a rug like Anime or the Trekkie fandom. It also doesn't help that some Furries aren't tactful of what they are into. They wear their fetishes like a badge of honor for all to see reguardless of the backlash they recieve with this utopian desire to accept all into the fold...which attracts "Colorful" individuals who hide behind a meat shield of socially inept people who carry that utopian desire and ostracize anyone who makes a critical opinion. 




So if I have none or if I have an opinion, I guess I am not a real furry. Phew! Glad we had this talk. :V

Being into any geekdom makes you a standard "Freak" because it can be seen as a social Abnorm. You play WoW, it makes you a freak. You play D&D, you are a freak. You up as a 18th century noble every day that looks as if s/he's a character in an Anne Rice novel, you are a freak. You speak fluent klingon, you are a freak. Dress up like an Imperial Stormtrooper, you are a freak and so-forth. 

By that logic, Anyone part of a fandom with sex or pornography in it (like Star Wars or Anime) is automatically a sexual deviant even if they aren't into that aspect of the subculture.  



> http://www.klisoura.com/ot_furrysurvey.php
> You're right the statistics changed. Closer to 30% bi now. Still absurdly high compared to the general population, and it does shoot up to 60 if you include the 'mostly' categories.



I know a lot of gay guys who are Star Wars nerds. They have a Mandalorian fetish because they like to dress up as mandalorians.
Same goes for a few people I know in the 501st Legion. :V
Can't forget the LGBT in the Goth subculture too. :V


When you think about it, sexual preference in the fandom is moot really. You'll probably come out with the same percentage of Gays and Lesbians into Anime or into the Sub-Mandalorian section of Star wars.


----------



## Fay V (Mar 24, 2011)

Kellie, your argument still assumes behavior that isn't necessarily there. For a moment we'll forget the connotative "fetish" is sexualized as a word. Your definitions state that someone has an _abnormal_ obsession or interest, or that something elicits an _unquestioning _reverence. 
So basically a furry is obsessed with furry artwork to an abnormal degree. That's not true. It might be true for some that only read stories with anthro people, or view art with anthros, but that's hardly the case for all. Your views are biased because you only see furries in the fandom. So you see, a person that comments on furry stories, anthro movies, and only posts furry art. What the person can be is someone that is commenting and posting subject appropriate stuff because it is a furry thread, and only posting their furry art to a furry site even if it is a minority of what they draw. 
Some people state that they are in the fandom for the community, we have non-furries on FaF a lot. So it's easily acceptable that a given furry could have a slight interest in anthro works and stay on forums mostly for the company. 

In other words there is no abnormal obsession. It isn't any more abnormal that someone liking Indiana Jones movies and finding it fun to talk to people about that. Yes extremes that do exist, yes anthro works art unquestionable to them, that doesn't mean it is for everyone. So again even when sex is not involved you need to assume a universal behavior for your definition to work. It doesn't. Furry is not universally a fetish.


----------



## FallenGlory (Mar 24, 2011)

damn, zeke, that's the best post i've seen in this forum yet....


----------



## Ozriel (Mar 24, 2011)

Fay V said:


> Kellie, your argument still assumes behavior that isn't necessarily there. For a moment we'll forget the connotative "fetish" is sexualized as a word. Your definitions state that someone has an _abnormal_ obsession or interest, or that something elicits an _unquestioning _reverence.
> So basically a furry is obsessed with furry artwork to an abnormal degree. That's not true. It might be true for some that only read stories with anthro people, or view art with anthros, but that's hardly the case for all. Your views are biased because you only see furries in the fandom. So you see, a person that comments on furry stories, anthro movies, and only posts furry art. What the person can be is someone that is commenting and posting subject appropriate stuff because it is a furry thread, and only posting their furry art to a furry site even if it is a minority of what they draw.
> Some people state that they are in the fandom for the community, we have non-furries on FaF a lot. So it's easily acceptable that a given furry could have a slight interest in anthro works and stay on forums mostly for the company.
> 
> In other words there is no abnormal obsession. It isn't any more abnormal that someone liking Indiana Jones movies and finding it fun to talk to people about that. Yes extremes that do exist, yes anthro works art unquestionable to them, that doesn't mean it is for everyone. So again even when sex is not involved you need to assume a universal behavior for your definition to work. It doesn't. Furry is not universally a fetish.



Good Job, Sulu. :V



FallenGlory said:


> damn, zeke, that's the best post i've seen in this forum yet....



Screw this fandom, I am going to join up with the 501st legion. :V


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 24, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Watch your comformation bias.
> Just because it is a fetish for you, or a sexual deviancy fandom for you doesn't mean it is the same for everyone else.
> If you tell people who do not know what a furry is that they are sexual deviants by default, then you are pushing your bias onto them. Other than that, no one has to accept your "Conformation bais" just because you and your friends says it is.  The reason why you and others will label it, because unlike other fandoms, Furry does not sweep their dirty things under a rug like Anime or the Trekkie fandom. It also doesn't help that some Furries aren't tactful of what they are into. They wear their fetishes like a badge of honor for all to see reguardless of the backlash they recieve with this utopian desire to accept all into the fold...which attracts "Colorful" individuals who hide behind a meat shield of socially inept people who carry that utopian desire and ostracize anyone who makes a critical opinion.


 This is something I can agree with. While I do think that furry is a fetish, that doesn't mean that furries should wear their fetishes so proudly like a badge of honor because it really doesn't help the fandom's already troubled image and just annoys the shit out of everyone.



Fay V said:


> Kellie, your argument still assumes behavior that isn't necessarily there. For a moment we'll forget the connotative "fetish" is sexualized as a word. Your definitions state that someone has an _abnormal_ obsession or interest, or that something elicits an _unquestioning _reverence.
> So basically a furry is obsessed with furry artwork to an abnormal degree. That's not true. It might be true for some that only read stories with anthro people, or view art with anthros, but that's hardly the case for all. Your views are biased because you only see furries in the fandom. So you see, a person that comments on furry stories, anthro movies, and only posts furry art. What the person can be is someone that is commenting and posting subject appropriate stuff because it is a furry thread, and only posting their furry art to a furry site even if it is a minority of what they draw.
> Some people state that they are in the fandom for the community, we have non-furries on FaF a lot. So it's easily acceptable that a given furry could have a slight interest in anthro works and stay on forums mostly for the company.
> 
> In other words there is no abnormal obsession. It isn't any more abnormal that someone liking Indiana Jones movies and finding it fun to talk to people about that. Yes extremes that do exist, yes anthro works art unquestionable to them, that doesn't mean it is for everyone. So again even when sex is not involved you need to assume a universal behavior for your definition to work. It doesn't. Furry is not universally a fetish.


You make some good points and I'm grateful that you actually understood the point I tried to make and responded to it in a mature and intelligent matter.

But I still ain't convinced, I'm afraid. Even a slight interest in anthropomorphic animals strikes me as extremely abnormal because it makes little sense and no, it's not like being a fan of Indiana Jones. Your "fandom" is based on a plot device. Like I said, it's exactly like making a fandom based on main characters who are orphans or suffer from amnesia or things like that. It'd make more sense for me if furry was more about appreciating others' works of fiction and characters but the majority of furries don't do that, they just create their own, extremely mediocre-at best-fictions and put themselves into these stories to live out some kind of bizarre fantasy.


----------



## FallenGlory (Mar 24, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> It'd make more sense for me if furry was more about appreciating others' works of fiction and characters but the majority of furries don't do that, they just create their own, extremely mediocre-at best-fictions and put themselves into these stories to live out some kind of bizarre fantasy.


Hey, I put alot of work into my shitty extremely-mediocre-at-best-fictions! :V


----------



## Fay V (Mar 24, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> You make some good points and I'm grateful that you actually understood the point I tried to make and responded to it in a mature and intelligent matter.
> 
> But I still ain't convinced, I'm afraid. Even a slight interest in anthropomorphic animals strikes me as extremely abnormal because it makes little sense and no, it's not like being a fan of Indiana Jones. Your "fandom" is based on a plot device. Like I said, it's exactly like making a fandom based on main characters who are orphans or suffer from amnesia or things like that. It'd make more sense for me if furry was more about appreciating others' works of fiction and characters but the majority of furries don't do that, they just create their own, extremely mediocre-at best-fictions and put themselves into these stories to live out some kind of bizarre fantasy.


 I'm going to use Zeke's tree thing to address this again, because I think you're looking at a branch, a twig even, and trying to treat it like the entire tree. 
Fantasy itself is a big interest with no particular focus. There are some markable works in fantasy, let's use Tolkien and fuck it, harry potter. Go on a fantasy forum and you can talk about that. Look at fantasy art and it's elves, dwarves, and wizards. It's a very broad category and sure as anything people make their own "characters". It's less extreme because they are mostly humanoid looking. Fantasy is not a fetish, it's an interest and you can easily focus it down. Go into gothic literature. You can go to a Gothic lit forum and discuss "the vampyre" "frankenstein" and other things written by Byron and the gang and discuss that literature tradition. There's no way to pretend that gothic literature isn't sexual in nature, but it's still not more than an interest at heart. Focus more and you get vampires, vampires aren't a fetish, they are damnably close to a sexual fetish but universally you can't really call them that seriously. 
Furry is a focus of fantasy. Inherit to the fandom is escapism, the focus is escapism like any other hobby and the artistic, literary device is the means. I can have a fursona and have an interest in that escapism but furry by not means requires me to have an obsession with it. You look at the expressions of a twig, and see it as a tree. If you saw someone's full interests it would hardly be notable if they also enjoyed vampires, werewolves, the themes of gothic lit, the ideas of fantasy. So again calling it a fetish is putting too much emphasis on the interest in a person's life. It assumes obsession that does not necessarily exist. 
I can make a DnD character today for myself, have an elf to help me escape from this world. That's 2 hours from my life. Yet I'll have taken part in that fandom. Does that make it my fetish now?


----------



## ChickO'Dee (Mar 24, 2011)

*sigh*
All sides of fandoms, hobbies, interests, even sports have a fetish side, and there is nothing you can change about it. Just because some people like to fuck while wearing football Jerseys, doesn't mean the football fanbase has a sexual interest in it as a whole. Just because a massive amount of horny fangirls write horrid fanfiction and draw shitty hentai, doesn't mean all anime lovers are into having sex with 2d poorly drawn characters. Saying liking anthro/furry is a fetish, would be like saying liking anime/manga is a fetish (ie, drawn characters with huge eyes and unnatural hair colors.)
Let the trolling commence..


----------



## Spatel (Mar 24, 2011)

> Other than that, no one has to accept your "Conformation bais" just because you and your friends says it is. The reason why you and others will label it, because unlike other fandoms, Furry does not sweep their dirty things under a rug like Anime or the Trekkie fandom.


Conformation bias goes both ways.

There is a persistent structural difference between the furry fandom and the trek and anime fandoms. You can draw analogies with them, but we're much less mainstream. The sexual dark alleys of the furry subculture are much more prominent, and they're a huge historical part of why the fandom exists in the first place.

There's another analogy you can draw. For a lot of furries the meets and conventions are like LGBT community meets--except for people with a furry fetish. You might say "but the conventions are clean and family-friendly." That's kind of the point. Queers don't get together to have orgies, even though their community is based on a shared sexual minority. They get together to hang out, make friends, and support each other. The same sort of comaraderie goes on at furry conventions. There might be hookups; there might be crazy room parties that turn into furpiles, but that's a secondary function of the cons. 

A sexual attraction to anthropomorphic characters is a fetish, not a full-on sexuality. It's a pretty harmless fetish to have though. It's still a legitimate sexual minority that deserves a dedicated community and the furry community was meant to be exactly that. As it turns out these people are very creative, and they've developed a subculture based on an artistic genre--which might some day gain some legitimacy as a fandom in its own right. 

It's not there yet. Most people outside the fandom that have heard of it still think it's a kinkfest. They're not buying it.

I don't buy it either. I've been to conventions. I've been active on numerous furry forums. While I haven't been prominent for most of that time, I've been a furry for the last 10 years. The mentality that furry is a "hobby" crops up every now and then, and we get these arguments. I think the sheer fact that we have to have these arguments should imply very heavily there is more going on than an arts-and-crafts fair.

The 'hobby' mentality comes from 3 different types of people:

-Fetishists who are in denial/too afraid to say anything that could associate them with zoophilia or some of the more extreme fetishes. They'll talk about dragon dick for hours on IRC, then say "oh it's just a hobby." Some of them post on the Den. Some of them have been arguing against me. 

-A group of intolerant, militant ex-furs that want to change the nature of the community.

-A small group of genuine art enthusiasts that are very naive and think the former groups don't exist.



			
				Fay V said:
			
		

> Furry is a focus of fantasy. Inherit to the fandom is escapism, the  focus is escapism like any other hobby and the artistic, literary device  is the means. I can have a fursona and have an interest in that  escapism but furry by not means requires me to have an obsession with  it. You look at the expressions of a twig, and see it as a tree. If you  saw someone's full interests it would hardly be notable if they also  enjoyed vampires, werewolves, the themes of gothic lit, the ideas of  fantasy. So again calling it a fetish is putting too much emphasis on  the interest in a person's life. It assumes obsession that does not  necessarily exist.
> I can make a DnD character today for myself, have an elf to help me  escape from this world. That's 2 hours from my life. Yet I'll have taken  part in that fandom. Does that make it my fetish now?



It does sort of sound like that. You're saying there are sexual elements, and that it's a form of escapism. Last I checked sexual escapism is what fetishes basically are.

I think there's a mentality on this forum that 'fetish' = bad. That having one makes you a pervert. That everyone with a fetish has to act on it in a sexual way in real life. That having a fetish means you -need- it to get off... which is absurd. Nobody has claimed in this entire thread that Furry is a sexuality. 

Get the fuck over yourselves. It carries much less weight than that.

Saying you like to pretend you're an anthropomorphic character is about as extreme as saying you like crossdressing. It IS crossdressing basically... just with a different species instead of a different gender. You can crossdressing for totally platonic reasons. Not a big deal. Just be mindful that it's going to be perceived as sexual by most people. For a lot of people it is, and there's nothing wrong with that.


----------



## Ozriel (Mar 24, 2011)

Spatel said:


> There is a persistent structural difference between the furry fandom and the trek and anime fandoms. You can draw analogies with them, but we're much less mainstream. The sexual dark alleys of the furry subculture are much more prominent, and they're a huge historical part of why the fandom exists in the first place.



The reason why they are prominent is because furries make them stick out. "Furry" doesn't have a cannon to hide behind like anime or Star Wars, so certain things will stick out if you walk in and search for it.

As for the history of it, the sexual aspect is only a part of the pie, not a whole. If it was more than 90% of the fandom, I would be on 7chan thinking of ways to make a bunch of sexually repressed dog cock fiends twitch and squirm. 



> There's another analogy you can draw. For a lot of furries the meets and conventions are like LGBT community meets--except for people with a furry fetish. You might say "but the conventions are clean and family-friendly." That's kind of the point. Queers don't get together to have orgies, even though their community is based on a shared sexual minority. They get together to hang out, make friends, and support each other. The same sort of comaraderie goes on at furry conventions. There might be hookups; there might be crazy room parties that turn into furpiles, but that's a secondary function of the cons.


Have you been to a comic-con, Sci-Fi con, or an anime convention? Don't see how that's relevant. 



> A sexual attraction to anthropomorphic characters is a fetish, not a full-on sexuality.


And yet many people here do not treat it as such. 




> It's still a legitimate sexual minority that deserves a dedicated community and the furry community was meant to be exactly that.



Minority =/= Majority.





> It's not there yet. Most people outside the fandom that have heard of it still think it's a kinkfest. They're not buying it.


Public perception was made to think this, so there will he a hard time changing it because of how the media and other outside influence percieves it. Sex sells. No one wants to hear how "3 people dressed up as wolves delivered toys to children dying of cancer". People will react to negative information than positive.




> I don't buy it either. I've been to conventions. I've been active on numerous furry forums. While I haven't been prominent for most of that time, I've been a furry for the last 10 years. The mentality that furry is a "hobby" crops up every now and then, and we get these arguments. I think the sheer fact that we have to have these arguments should imply very heavily there is more going on than an arts-and-crafts fair.
> 
> The 'hobby' mentality comes from 3 different types of people:
> 
> ...


 
So your answer is to just  lie down accept what the perception has made? No, sorry. It may work for you, but to others I doubt they'll be happy to hear that.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Mar 24, 2011)

Spatel said:


> It's a transparent argument because it's an easy argument that writes itself.
> 
> You can't call "being a Furry" a hobby. Being a member of any community is not the same as having a hobby. Drawing furry art, building fursuits... those are hobbies. There are hundreds of different "furry-related" hobbies someone can have.
> 
> ...



Do you realise how much bullshit you are spouting? I read as far as the first paragraph and gave up.


----------



## Ozriel (Mar 24, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> Do you realise how much bullshit you are spouting? I read as far as the first paragraph and gave up.


 
I should just give up and see the argument as what it is: pissing into a sea of piss...buckets. :V


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Mar 24, 2011)

Spatel said:


> Conformation bias goes both ways.
> 
> There is a persistent structural difference between the furry fandom and the trek and anime fandoms. You can draw analogies with them, but we're much less mainstream. The sexual dark alleys of the furry subculture are much more prominent, and they're a huge historical part of why the fandom exists in the first place.



I disagree to some point.



> There's another analogy you can draw. For a lot of furries the meets and conventions are like LGBT community meets--*except for people with a furry fetish.* You might say "but the conventions are clean and family-friendly." That's kind of the point. Queers don't get together to have orgies, even though their community is based on a shared sexual minority. They get together to hang out, make friends, and support each other. The same sort of comaraderie goes on at furry conventions. There might be hookups; there might be crazy room parties that turn into furpiles, but that's a secondary function of the cons.


You are assuming here that everyone who has an interest in furry, is also being furry for fetish reasons. Not everyone furry is in furry because of a "furry fetish" You might be, but not all of us are.



> A sexual attraction to anthropomorphic characters is a fetish, not a full-on sexuality. It's a pretty harmless fetish to have though. It's still a legitimate sexual minority that deserves a dedicated community and the furry community was meant to be exactly that. As it turns out these people are very creative, and they've developed a subculture based on an artistic genre--which might some day gain some legitimacy as a fandom in its own right.


This is only if you have a sexual attraction to anthropomorphic animals, again, not every person in this fandom has such attraction.



> I don't buy it either. I've been to conventions. I've been active on numerous furry forums. While I haven't been prominent for most of that time, I've been a furry for the last 10 years. The mentality that furry is a "hobby" crops up every now and then, and we get these arguments. I think the sheer fact that we have to have these arguments should imply very heavily there is more going on than an arts-and-crafts fair.


Calling furry a hobby is not some stupid mentality. To a lot of people it is just a hobby, to me it's just a hobby, it's something I do while online. You get classic car enthusiasts, that is a hobby and THEY also go to classic car meets, rally's and shows. What you are arguing is utter bullshit. Furry is a hobby.



> The 'hobby' mentality comes from 3 different types of people:
> 
> -Fetishists who are in denial/too afraid to say anything that could associate them with zoophilia or some of the more extreme fetishes. They'll talk about dragon dick for hours on IRC, then say "oh it's just a hobby." Some of them post on the Den. Some of them have been arguing against me.
> 
> ...


I don't believe I'm reading this shit.



> I think there's a mentality on this forum that 'fetish' = bad. That having one makes you a pervert. That everyone with a fetish has to act on it in a sexual way in real life. That having a fetish means you -need- it to get off... which is absurd. Nobody has claimed in this entire thread that Furry is a sexuality.


Because furry isn't a sexuality?





> Saying you like to pretend you're an anthropomorphic character is about as extreme as saying you like crossdressing. It IS crossdressing basically... just with a different species instead of a different gender. You can crossdressing for totally platonic reasons. Not a big deal. Just be mindful that it's going to be perceived as sexual by most people. For a lot of people it is, and there's nothing wrong with that.



Roleplaying comes into the class of being a hobby. The fandom is full of hobbies. There's writing, roleplaying, fursuiting, conventions and of course, the art. The sexual aspect is just a small section of the fandom. As I stated before, not all members are in it for the sexual aspect as you like to make out they are.

Get ya head out of ya ass and observe more.


----------



## Fay V (Mar 24, 2011)

Spatel said:


> Conformation bias goes both ways.
> 
> There is a persistent structural difference between the furry fandom and the trek and anime fandoms. You can draw analogies with them, but we're much less mainstream. The sexual dark alleys of the furry subculture are much more prominent, and they're a huge historical part of why the fandom exists in the first place.
> 
> ...


 
You missed the point, on several accounts. First of all I was noting that escapism does not = obsession, in reply to Kellie. 
Second, sexual acitivities in something do not make it a fetish. Escapism and sexual escapism are two different things. Take pokemon, that is escapism, pretend you are a pokemon master and so on and so forth, it wasn't sexual conquest when I was 8, it was getting away from school and having fun. Everything, every damn thing in this world has a sexual element to it. It is the ultimate rule 34 in that if someone take notes of it, someone has also sexualized it. That doesn't universalize the entire thing as a fetish. 
Somone has drawn porn of pokemon, that does not mean pokemon is itself a fetish. 

Words carry weight, to call something a fetish means something, it applies automatic universal behavior that the activities in the fandom are either sexual or obsessive. Neither are inherently true. It may be true for individuals, but that is like saying everyone that plays pokemon automatically picks the fire starters. get it? Still no? 
The reason you don't just give in and say "yeah it's a fetish" is it implies wrong information. It's calling a whale a fish. Mammal and Fish are both perfectly fine in themselves, but calling a whale a fish just leads to inaccurate assumptions that are carried with the connotation of the word. 

If you really want to be a furry fetishist then call yourself that, but stop trying to apply the label to where it doesn't fit. Otherwise would you enjoy being called a Hindu, Vegan, native-American, filmmaker. There's absolutely nothing wrong with any of those things, but I'm sure none of them apply to you, and you would correct someone that tries to use that label on you.


----------



## Ozriel (Mar 24, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> Good stuff



Randy, I am sorry. :{


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Mar 24, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> Randy, I am sorry. :{


 
Sorry for what?


----------



## Ozriel (Mar 24, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> Sorry for what?


 
For you reading that mess that you replied to. :{


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Mar 24, 2011)

Zeke Shadowfyre said:


> For you reading that mess that you replied to. :{



It just looks like Spatel is trolling, to me. The way he/she/it is making out furry to be nothing more than a sexual fetish is the sort of thing most trolls will do.


----------



## Fay V (Mar 24, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> It just looks like Spatel is trolling, to me. The way he/she/it is making out furry to be nothing more than a sexual fetish is the sort of thing most trolls will do.


 It always seems like desperation when people do this. They can't get off without furry so they try to make it seem more normal by saying everyone in furry fandom can't.

might not be the case, but it comes off that way.


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (Mar 24, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> The way he/she/it is making out furry to be nothing more than a sexual fetish is the sort of thing most trolls will do.



The fact that there are furries who buy into that is what pisses me off about the fandom.


----------



## Spatel (Mar 24, 2011)

Hakar Kerarmor said:


> The fact that there are furries who buy into that is what pisses me off about the fandom.


 
It's a common view outside FaF. The fact that people in the Den are so insulated from opposing viewpoints pisses me off a bit, so I'm doing my part to end that.



Fay V said:


> You missed the point, on several accounts. First of all I was noting that escapism does not = obsession, in reply to Kellie.
> Second, sexual acitivities in something do not make it a fetish. Escapism and sexual escapism are two different things. Take pokemon, that is escapism, pretend you are a pokemon master and so on and so forth, it wasn't sexual conquest when I was 8, it was getting away from school and having fun. Everything, every damn thing in this world has a sexual element to it. It is the ultimate rule 34 in that if someone take notes of it, someone has also sexualized it. That doesn't universalize the entire thing as a fetish.
> Somone has drawn porn of pokemon, that does not mean pokemon is itself a fetish.


Heh... Furries are the ones that draw pokemon porn, and it isn't considered a separate fetish because it's lumped in with the Furry fetish. Also... Furries are one of the main reasons rule 34 was invented. (I know that's nothing to do with your point and I hope nobody focuses on it). 

I like the point you made though. It's a good one, and I think I can use it to articulate the central message I'm working on.

Pokemon are anthropomorphic characters, so of course Furries generally like pokemon. Furries are people that have an "interest in anthropomorphic characters", right? What kind of interest? How does that work? Anthro characters come in all shapes and sizes. It's not a single style of art, and it's not a genre. It's a *tool for characterization* that can be used in many styles, many genres, many media. You can't say furries are fans of "art that looks like this". They're fans of... a tool for characterization?

Many artists that don't consider themselves furries use that tool occasionally.

Furry artists are different in that they use that tool all the time. It's the primary tool in their arsenal. I think there is a -bit- of an obsessive aspect to that. It is very different from liking "Anime" or liking "Star Trek". 

Imagine instead of being a Star Trek fan, someone drew comics that had nothing to do with the show, but all of the characters wore starfleet uniforms. Suppose other people liked that and did the same thing with their art, and eventually you create a fandom based around characters wearing nothing but starfleet uniforms. It's an exact analogy--they are fans of a type of characterization. From where I'm sitting, that looks pretty fetishy. I think it is either obsessive or sexual because it's too narrow a focus on characterization to be explained any other way, unless someone else can. You're welcome to, so please try, if you think you can.


----------



## TrinityWolfess (Mar 24, 2011)

Because furry is also a lifestyle we live.


----------



## Mentova (Mar 24, 2011)

TrinityWolfess said:


> Because furry is also a lifestyle we live.


 No, it's not.

It's just a hobby.


----------



## TrinityWolfess (Mar 24, 2011)

Heckler & Koch said:


> No, it's not.
> 
> It's just a hobby.


 
Some people take it to the extreme


----------



## Mentova (Mar 24, 2011)

TrinityWolfess said:


> Some people take it to the extreme


 That doesn't mean it's a "lifestyle" (and I use that term lightly) for everyone. The point is, like mentioned above, furry is different for everyone. For some, they wanna fuck giant titted animal people, others like the art, the costuming, the characters, etc. Overall, it's a hobby. There are many branches of the hobby and people's involvement various; but it's a hobby. Pure and simple.


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Mar 24, 2011)

TrinityWolfess said:


> Because furry is also a lifestyle we live.



Not it's not. Well, not for me it isn't. Just because you might live furry as a lifestyle doesn't mean we all fucking do. You and Spatula need to stop labeling everyone as the same thing. You two seem to forget we are all individuals and as such do not follow the leader.



TrinityWolfess said:


> *Some* people take it to the extreme



I've bolded the key word here. Yes some people do make furry more of a lifestyle, but just because some people do doesn't make it a lifestyle in general, just a lifestyle for those who treat it as one.


I treat it as a hobby. I look at the art and collect art including comics. I do a spot of role playing here and there. I use the fandom to talk and socialize with others who share a similar interest. So to me, furry is a hobby. I also keep it to the computer, I don't wear tails or ears or collars in public, or do anything furry related in public, my home shows no signs of furry.


----------



## â™¥Mirandaâ™¥ (Mar 24, 2011)

Spatel said:


> It's a common view outside FaF. The fact that people in the Den are so insulated from opposing viewpoints pisses me off a bit, so I'm doing my part to end that.


 When you go to places like sofurry forums or pawsru, chances are the posts there are going to be sexually oriented. Most other furry message boards pander to fetishists. Those guys aren't us.

This links back to that sub-sub group thing that Canonfodder was talking about. Those sites you're talking about pander to a specific subgroup. Go over to the furry facebook page. Those guys all don't care much for porn. They're another sub-sub group of furries.

Stop treeing the branch. We're all linked by -one- thing, and that's the interest in anthropomorphics.




			
				Spatel said:
			
		

> Heh... Furries are the ones that draw pokemon porn, and it isn't considered a separate fetish because it's lumped in with the Furry fetish. *Also... Furries are one of the main reasons rule 34 was invented*. (I know that's nothing to do with your point and I hope nobody focuses on it).



No they're not.

No they're not no they're not no they're not no they're not no they're not no they're not no they're not

are you seriously trying to say that the weird fetish rule wasn't around before furries? Really?



			
				Spatel said:
			
		

> Furry artists are different in that they use that tool all the time. It's the primary tool in their arsenal. I think there is a -bit- of an obsessive aspect to that. It is very different from liking "Anime" or liking "Star Trek".



That's funny because I recall anime artists drawing mostly in the anime style



			
				Spatel said:
			
		

> Imagine instead of being a Star Trek fan, someone drew comics that had nothing to do with the show, but all of the characters wore starfleet uniforms. Suppose other people liked that and did the same thing with their art, and eventually you create a fandom based around characters wearing nothing but starfleet uniforms. It's an exact analogy--they are fans of a type of characterization. From where I'm sitting, that looks pretty fetishy. I think it is either obsessive or sexual because it's too narrow a focus on characterization to be explained any other way, unless someone else can. You're welcome to, so please try, if you think you can.


 
Have you ever seen a startrek fan character

You are the worst troll ever


----------



## Heimdal (Mar 24, 2011)

Furry is part fetish by default, because it is defined differently every damn time I see people using the word. The Furry fandom is all-encompassing and all-accepting, with the only single stipulation being "human-like". It's like a big amorphous blob. It's not all fetish, but it's all mixed together. It's hard to separate the two so easily when the most popular art and community website is also it's biggest porn site at the same time. The difference between the fetish side and the regular side appears to just be the adult filter. That's weird to me.

I don't know which I side with. I think both sides have a point. I think that 'furry', not knowing what the hell it fits under, is it's greatest defense, and it's biggest problem.


----------



## MaverickCowboy (Mar 25, 2011)

u guise r dumb. Furry is a religion.


----------



## Fay V (Mar 25, 2011)

the rule 34 thing was my favorite. Someone doesn't know shit about history if they think "furries" are why rule 34 exists. 
Bone up on your Renaissance art, particularly anything about greek mythology. furries are barely a drop in the pool of people fucking things they probably shouldn't.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 25, 2011)

Fay V said:


> I'm going to use Zeke's tree thing to address this again, because I think you're looking at a branch, a twig even, and trying to treat it like the entire tree.
> Fantasy itself is a big interest with no particular focus. There are some markable works in fantasy, let's use Tolkien and fuck it, harry potter. Go on a fantasy forum and you can talk about that. Look at fantasy art and it's elves, dwarves, and wizards. It's a very broad category and sure as anything people make their own "characters". It's less extreme because they are mostly humanoid looking. Fantasy is not a fetish, it's an interest and you can easily focus it down. Go into gothic literature. You can go to a Gothic lit forum and discuss "the vampyre" "frankenstein" and other things written by Byron and the gang and discuss that literature tradition. There's no way to pretend that gothic literature isn't sexual in nature, but it's still not more than an interest at heart. Focus more and you get vampires, vampires aren't a fetish, they are damnably close to a sexual fetish but universally you can't really call them that seriously.
> Furry is a focus of fantasy. Inherit to the fandom is escapism, the focus is escapism like any other hobby and the artistic, literary device is the means. I can have a fursona and have an interest in that escapism but furry by not means requires me to have an obsession with it. You look at the expressions of a twig, and see it as a tree. If you saw someone's full interests it would hardly be notable if they also enjoyed vampires, werewolves, the themes of gothic lit, the ideas of fantasy. So again calling it a fetish is putting too much emphasis on the interest in a person's life. It assumes obsession that does not necessarily exist.
> I can make a DnD character today for myself, have an elf to help me escape from this world. That's 2 hours from my life. Yet I'll have taken part in that fandom. Does that make it my fetish now?


This might have been my own fault for expressing myself poorly, but I think that maybe you're putting a little too much emphasis on the word "obsession". I never said people need to abuse their furry-ness like a drug, just like most people with a fetish don't have to do take part in it all the time, or even on a daily basis. But I still think furry's a fetish because you can't really compare it with sci-fi or fantasy. It's an unusual interest/fixation, much like a fetish is. It makes about as much sense as being a fan of balloons.



Spatel said:


> Anthro characters come in all shapes and sizes. It's not a single style of art, and it's not a genre. It's a *tool for characterization* that can be used in many styles, many genres, many media. You can't say furries are fans of "art that looks like this". They're fans of... a tool for characterization?
> 
> Many artists that don't consider themselves furries use that tool occasionally.
> 
> Furry artists are different in that they use that tool all the time. It's the primary tool in their arsenal. I think there is a -bit- of an obsessive aspect to that. It is very different from liking "Anime" or liking "Star Trek".


This is kinda what I've been talking about and also why I have my stance on this issue. You can't really make a "fandom" or a "hobby" out of a tool of characterization. It's bizarre at best and you can't really class anthropomorphism as a "genre" because all fictional works involving anthropomorphism are too different from each other, ranging from Mickey Mouse to Redwall.



MaverickCowboy said:


> u guise r dumb. Furry is a religion.


WIN POST IS WIN.

(and for the record, I saw some guy on YouTube who tried to say that furry IS a religion just to find an excuse to make people stop trolling them, shit was hilarious)


----------



## Fay V (Mar 25, 2011)

Kellie Gator said:


> This might have been my own fault for expressing myself poorly, but I think that maybe you're putting a little too much emphasis on the word "obsession". I never said people need to abuse their furry-ness like a drug, just like most people with a fetish don't have to do take part in it all the time, or even on a daily basis. But I still think furry's a fetish because you can't really compare it with sci-fi or fantasy. It's an unusual interest/fixation, much like a fetish is. It makes about as much sense as being a fan of balloons.


 That seems like a general scifi or fantasy convention. You have things like dragoncon which encompass a lot. scifi and fantasy are just a genre that have absurd amounts of focuses. Semantically fixation implies obsession so really we're just playing a game of semantics on how much of a focus someone has on something to constitute a fetish. I think we've hit a stalemate on that point personally. 
Even admitting that fetish does apply, I think connotation is the biggest point to consider. In order to agree on a way for fetish to apply, we had to play word games for a bit. when speaking with a person you don't normally do that, but go with the connotation, which for fetish is sexual. To just call the fandom a fetish would apply that sexual connotation to the whole thing, which we know isn't true. Hobby fits better to the basic overall group. 
Hobby and fetish are not mutually exclusive, but from a connotative standpoint, hobby is the lowest common denominator of meaning. You can call it a fetish, but to appropriately portray the meaning you would need to explain your usage of that word. When you don't have the convenience to give that explanation, hobby is a better word to use. Interest, focus, any of those work better as a whole. some behavior, some sub groups can be appropriately described as a fetish without a problem, but the entire fandom can't so it's easier not to call it a fetish and remain accurate if you're talking about the whole.


----------



## Kellie Gator (Mar 25, 2011)

Fay V said:


> That seems like a general scifi or fantasy convention. You have things like dragoncon which encompass a lot. scifi and fantasy are just a genre that have absurd amounts of focuses. Semantically fixation implies obsession so really we're just playing a game of semantics on how much of a focus someone has on something to constitute a fetish. I think we've hit a stalemate on that point personally.
> Even admitting that fetish does apply, I think connotation is the biggest point to consider. In order to agree on a way for fetish to apply, we had to play word games for a bit. when speaking with a person you don't normally do that, but go with the connotation, which for fetish is sexual. To just call the fandom a fetish would apply that sexual connotation to the whole thing, which we know isn't true. Hobby fits better to the basic overall group.
> Hobby and fetish are not mutually exclusive, but from a connotative standpoint, hobby is the lowest common denominator of meaning. You can call it a fetish, but to appropriately portray the meaning you would need to explain your usage of that word. When you don't have the convenience to give that explanation, hobby is a better word to use. Interest, focus, any of those work better as a whole. some behavior, some sub groups can be appropriately described as a fetish without a problem, but the entire fandom can't so it's easier not to call it a fetish and remain accurate if you're talking about the whole.


This is something I can agree with. It's a risky word to use. Either you don't tell anyone at all or you try to find a word that won't give someone else a negative image of the community. I just personally don't like to use the words "fandom" or "hobby" because they strike me as highly inaccurate. I haven't told anyone except my older brother that I'm part of the community at this point and have no intentions to let anyone else know, so I hope I won't ever have to explain it to anyone.

My point in this whole thread was basically just to tell the people who went insane with raeg that fetish =/= sexual and that it doesn't even have to carry any negative meaning to it, so they need to chill out.


----------



## Art Vulpine (Mar 25, 2011)

What we have here is word meanings and usage.

Some say fandom as in we are fans of furries. Those who argue with the word say that we are different from other fandoms like Star Trek or Lord of the Rings.

Some say hobby, something to do. Those who argue may say that it goes beyond just a hobby.

Some say lifestyle, a way we live. Those who argue this say that there are other things they are interested in doing.

Some say fetish, which can be seen as an obsession. Others would argue that fetish implies a sexual connotation and that too many anti-furs use this to spread negative stereotyping. 

Personally, I call it an interest or a fandom. I am interested in it and even though it is not as defined as Star Wars it still can be concidered a fandom by genre like Anime is a fandom by genre or scifi or steampunk.


----------



## Hakar Kerarmor (Mar 25, 2011)

MaverickCowboy said:


> u guise r dumb. Furry is a religion.


 
Ignore this dingleberry. Furry is obviously a nationality.
I mean, why not just call it one?


----------



## Maisuki (Mar 25, 2011)

A small part of me died inside when I saw that this debate (if such fail can even be called that) was still going on.


----------



## Spatel (Mar 25, 2011)

Tybalt Maxwell said:


> When you go to places like sofurry forums or pawsru, chances are the posts there are going to be sexually oriented. Most other furry message boards pander to fetishists. Those guys aren't us.
> 
> This links back to that sub-sub group thing that Canonfodder was talking about. Those sites you're talking about pander to a specific subgroup. Go over to the furry facebook page. Those guys all don't care much for porn. They're another sub-sub group of furries.
> 
> Stop treeing the branch. We're all linked by -one- thing, and that's the interest in anthropomorphics.



And what kind of interest is it? In what way are furries 'interested' in anthropomorphics?




> That's funny because I recall anime artists drawing mostly in the anime style


It's a style, yes. Postmodern japanese animation is also a movement in art. Saying you're a fan of anime is like saying you're a fan of impressionism. It's very different than saying you're a Furry.


----------



## Fay V (Mar 25, 2011)

Spatel said:


> And what kind of interest is it? In what way are furries 'interested' in anthropomorphics?


What are you trying to dig at here? Seriously do you honestly think the entire thing is about sex? Apparently if you think furries invented rule 34
Furries can be interested in the community, like many of the FaF regulars here. Personally I like the art and suiting. I really enjoy the way I can use certain animal features in my art to portray a certain kind of personality. It's an interest in using that literary device.


----------



## â™¥Mirandaâ™¥ (Mar 25, 2011)

Spatel said:


> And what kind of interest is it? In what way are furries 'interested' in anthropomorphics?


Whichever way they want to be, enough to say you're a fan of it.


			
				Spatel said:
			
		

> It's a style, yes. Postmodern japanese animation is also a movement in art. Saying you're a fan of anime is like saying you're a fan of impressionism. It's very different than saying you're a Furry.


If you're saying that anime is a movement in art because it's an established kind of art, then by your logic anthropomorphics would be as well...


----------



## Spatel (Mar 25, 2011)

Fay V said:


> Furries can be interested in the community, like many of the FaF regulars here. Personally I like the art and suiting. I really enjoy the way I can use certain animal features in my art to portray a certain kind of personality. It's an interest in using that literary device.


 
Being interested in the community doesn't make you a Furry. You can participate in the LGBT community and be straight. So what? You can participate in the furry community without being a furry. We have a pretty awesome community full of some of the chillest, most non-judgmental people on the planet. There is some serious artistic talent, and there's a different social atmosphere at the meets/conventions that's fun to soak in. There are lots of reasons non-furs go to conventions.

Keep going: why do you like the art? Why do you like using certain animal features to portray personality? Why do you think a community has sprung up around this characterization tool? If you can come up with a serious answer that isn't obsessive or sexual I'll seriously reconsider my position. I'm not trolling. This is a productive argument, and you could change my mind.



			
				Tybalt Maxwell said:
			
		

> If you're saying that anime is a movement in art because it's an  established kind of art, then by your logic anthropomorphics would be as  well...


Anthropomorphization is a characterization tool. Read my last few posts. Anthro art appears in many styles and movements. It's not a singular thing you can be a fan of. It's like saying "I like characters that are bald." If baldies formed their own fan community, people on the outside would think it's a fetish, and you really couldn't blame them.


----------



## Calemeyr (Mar 25, 2011)

Why not? Because it covers up our real fetishes, like ritualistic human sacrifice. Wait...I didn't say that.


----------



## Fay V (Mar 25, 2011)

Your analogy is false. Furry is not a sexuality. It doesn't matter either way since the only way to be furry is to say you are a furry. I choose to call myself a furry because of my art and fursuiting. 
Your biggest problem is you are looking for a reason that doesn't exist. There is no serious answer for why I enjoy anthros. It's fun. Why were the loony toons all anthro, it's fun. that's all there really is too it. I suppose you expect me to dig deep and discover it's all sexual, but it's not. I'm not in the fandom for sex, furries are actually a big turn off for me, so the only answer I can give you is, it's fun. 
With anyone it will be a number of reasons. I like old stories like Aesop and reynard the fox. Someone else may have really liked mickey mouse as a kid. Because it is so broad a large number of people can come together and enjoy the community and art even if the origin of the interest was different.


----------



## Icky (Mar 25, 2011)

how the hell is this still up for debate?


----------



## â™¥Mirandaâ™¥ (Mar 25, 2011)

Spatel said:


> Anthropomorphization is a characterization tool. Read my last few posts. Anthro art appears in many styles and movements. It's not a singular thing you can be a fan of. It's like saying "I like characters that are bald." If baldies formed their own fan community, people on the outside would think it's a fetish, and you really couldn't blame them.


 
It's not a singular thing you can be a fan of, and yet you're posting this on a forum which panders to fans of it.

There are many fans of character types. Most of these fangroups however, aren't as mainstream as furries so they don't get heard about. Take for example fans of alien characters. These guys aren't big enough to have their own websites, and just get lumped in with Sci-fi fans (I could however be wrong. If somebody knows of a site that caters specifically to fans of alien characters, feel free to have me stand corrected). It's kind of also important to remember that furries were once also lumped in with Sci-fi before we got our own cons and shit going on.

Go to Deviant art and look up "Carsona". There's a whole group dedicated to being fans of car characters.

Being a fan of a certain character type is a concept that exists. It pretty much never didn't exist. Ever


----------



## Randy-Darkshade (Mar 25, 2011)

Spatel said:


> Anthropomorphization is a characterization tool. Read my last few posts. Anthro art appears in many styles and movements. It's not a singular thing you can be a fan of. It's like saying "I like characters that are bald." If baldies formed their own fan community, people on the outside would think it's a fetish, and you really couldn't blame them.



Yes it can be, you can like just one particular furry art style. You can like furry art and not like the pornographic side of it, that is what filters are for. I know a furry who hates the porn side of it and refuses to view it. Just because you like furry art, does not mean you like ALL types of furry art.

This also just crossed my mind. A fetish doesn't necessarily mean it is sexual, A fetish can be non sexual too. For example I adore squirrels, I have ornaments and plushies everywhere of squirrels, my best friend often says I have a "squirrel fetish".


----------



## phoxxz (Mar 26, 2011)

Randy-Darkshade said:


> Yes it can be, you can like just one particular furry art style. You can like furry art and not like the pornographic side of it, that is what filters are for. I know a furry who hates the porn side of it and refuses to view it. Just because you like furry art, does not mean you like ALL types of furry art.
> 
> This also just crossed my mind. A fetish doesn't necessarily mean it is sexual, A fetish can be non sexual too. For example I adore squirrels, I have ornaments and plushies everywhere of squirrels, my best friend often says I have a "squirrel fetish".




 You're right that 'fetish' has multiple definitions but  in today's society it's usually the one regarding sexual obsession. Its just where people 'go' first when they hear it. Yanno?

And I definitely would not SOLELY consider furry a fetish. Like aforementioned, there are many people who don't associate with the fetishism of it. I for one don't. I draw fur porn and I fav it, sure. But Specifically for me its a more...simple explanation, its easier than people. lol. I don't YIFF. I don't RP. I don't suit-sex or find animals sexually attractive. 

I sometimes get pissed off, even when people automatically jump to furry being a fetish because it lays alot of stereotypes on me when people know about it, and I'm not okay with being lumped into the sexual side of it. A similar argument would be - just because SOME gay people are flamboyant and promiscuousness DOES NOT mean all of them are, AT ALL.
'


----------

