# Why is the Furry Fandom frowned upon by mainstream society?



## moo moo who who (Nov 12, 2017)

Anthropomorphic characters are literally seen everywhere in our society, from characters in Disney to mascots and such. The idea of animals with human characteristics are normalized in our society, yet when someone says they are a Furry, there is a negative connotation to it? In a sense, there really is a large population that likes anthropomorphic characters. To what extent does it take for someone to be considered a furry?


----------



## Yakamaru (Nov 12, 2017)

Because of the image and reputation the fandom itself have. 

Only the Furry fandom in particular have this level of concentrated degeneracy and outright socially inept people. You don't really see this in any other fandom.

Furries are also a lot more open about their sexuality and identity, which have both pros and cons. And the cons are often exaggerated by media and individuals in general.


----------



## Sagt (Nov 12, 2017)

I think the negative image we have is mostly the result of the sexual connotation that a lot of non-furries have with the fandom. They think the sexual elements are weird, and many of them seem to have some misconceptions on those aspects of the fandom. For instance, I think a somewhat common misconception is that we are a fetish, which just isn't true; there are many furries with fetishes, and lots of others who enjoy NSFW anthro artwork, but this isn't the main focus of the subculture. 

I'm inclined to believe that the fandom doesn't have as bad an image as it thinks it does, though. Many people probably don't even know what a furry is, and others, who do know of us, may be totally indifferent.


----------



## P_Dragon (Nov 12, 2017)

Yakamaru said:


> outright socially inept people.


----------



## Crimcyan (Nov 12, 2017)

Beacuse people like to hate on things they dont understand. 
Im scared this thread is gonna start a fire again


----------



## ResolutionBlaze (Nov 12, 2017)

moo moo who who said:


> Anthropomorphic characters are literally seen everywhere in our society, from characters in Disney to mascots and such. The idea of animals with human characteristics are normalized in our society, yet when someone says they are a Furry, there is a negative connotation to it? In a sense, there really is a large population that likes anthropomorphic characters. To what extent does it take for someone to be considered a furry?



It isn't the anthromorphs.

It's the orgies and porn and fursuiters and weird shit like that.  Animalistic behavior, pretending you're said animal.

I think furries oversimplify the issue here.  People don't have a problem with furries.  It's what furries do.


----------



## Simo (Nov 12, 2017)

Sometimes I think certain people just like to frown.

Or that when some people see others having a lot of fun, doing something that seems imaginative, carefree and offers a certain escape from the confines of reality as they know it, and the boundaries this opens up, it strikes them as transgressive, and they get on their moral high horses. Or, they just get jealous that they're not having fun, and they probably have boring sex lives . : P

But I think most people have much bigger things to worry about than furries: such as healthcare, finding and keeping a job that keeps a roof over their head, wars, crime, drugs, alcohol, their own interpersonal relationships, families, lonliness, and other things that people all deal with, that I can't see furries even being a very big deal, all things considered.


----------



## Yakamaru (Nov 12, 2017)

ResolutionBlaze said:


> It isn't the anthromorphs.
> 
> It's the orgies and porn and fursuiters and weird shit like that.  Animalistic behavior, pretending you're said animal.
> 
> I think furries oversimplify the issue here.  People don't have a problem with furries.  It's what furries do.


Self-awareness. A decent amount of people in this fandom lacks it, which is why it has the problems it have.



P_Dragon said:


>


Some of the most socially inept people I've ever met are Furries. I would argue that there's a correlation between the two. 

Until the day people get some self-awareness and take responsibility and accountability for their own shitty behaviour, this fandom is going to continue being in the dump.


----------



## Scales42 (Nov 12, 2017)

I really hate to be this guy who only answers threads with pictures, but this just fits so good.







I dont mind it tho....


----------



## Ramjet (Nov 12, 2017)




----------



## JustSomeDude84 (Nov 12, 2017)

Yakamaru said:


> Self-awareness. A decent amount of people in this fandom lacks it, which is why it has the problems it have.
> 
> 
> Some of the most socially inept people I've ever met are Furries. I would argue that there's a correlation between the two.
> ...


That reminds me, I completely forgot how socially inept some gamers are too. I guess that's my closest comparison that I've personally seen.


----------



## Ginza (Nov 12, 2017)

+1 to everything that's been said. Porn, it's obscure, social ineptitude, and constantly talking about it. Quite honestly, the negativity towards this fandom is fairly deserved. When you act like a degenerate, you shall be treated as such. Being a furry isn't inherently bad of course, it's just what you do with it. My advice, keep your furry shit between you and other furs. Enough with the furry pride and shoving it into people's faces. Best not to care about the fandom's image. Just enjoy what you enjoy and keep things out of your every day life


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 12, 2017)

Because a lot of furries draw furry porn, which people equate with zoophilia or at least faunoiphilia, the attraction to watching animals mate.

Yet rare is the person who doesn't secretly giggle and watch the Discovery channel with 100% pure intentions.


----------



## Simo (Nov 12, 2017)

I dunno. I don't really care what people think about the porn.

I mean, my God...look at the expolsive popularity of those corny books and movies in that '50 Shades of Grey' series. Furries are a huge improvement, over that, anyday : P

I think a lotta folks are just not comfortable with sex period, and have a hard time seeing it beyond certain confines, and in an imaginative manner. It's not like I'm gonna march down the sidewalk, with a group of furs holding up posters of furry porn, but I'm not gonna discourage it in the fandom. 

If folks don't like it, they can kiss my skunky ass, for all I care : P

I guess I never have really got why people care so much about the image of the fandom, or, for that matter, put so much stake in how others view them.


----------



## ResolutionBlaze (Nov 12, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> Because a lot of furries draw furry porn, which people equate with zoophilia or at least faunoiphilia, the attraction to watching animals mate.
> 
> Yet rare is the person who doesn't secretly giggle and watch the Discovery channel with 100% pure intentions.



Not many normies are turned on by cricket orgies.


----------



## ResolutionBlaze (Nov 12, 2017)

Simo said:


> I dunno. I don't really care what people think about the porn.
> 
> I mean, my God...look at the expolsive popularity of those corny books and movies in that '50 Shades of Grey' series. Furries are a huge improvement, over that, anyday : P
> 
> ...



Can I kiss your skunky ass?  X3


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 12, 2017)

ResolutionBlaze said:


> Not many normies are turned on by cricket orgies.



What? *mutes Discovery channel* I knew that!


----------



## Simo (Nov 12, 2017)

ResolutionBlaze said:


> Can I kiss your skunky ass?  X3



*lifts tail*

Sure!


----------



## ResolutionBlaze (Nov 12, 2017)

Simo said:


> *lifts tail*
> 
> Sure!



This was a bad idea


----------



## Yakamaru (Nov 12, 2017)

Simo said:


> *lifts tail*
> 
> Sure!


_slaps that nice skunky butt_



Simo said:


> I mean, my God...look at the expolsive popularity of those corny books and movies in that '50 Shades of Grey' series. Furries are a huge improvement, over that, anyday : P


Just.. Eww.


----------



## Simo (Nov 12, 2017)

ResolutionBlaze said:


> This was a bad idea



Well, maybe it can be on the Discovery channel. We'll be famous!


----------



## Huluvoo (Nov 12, 2017)

It's not exactly simple to pin-point one thing to explain why the furry fandom is frowned up on and discouraged. When you sit down and think about it, it isn't just one factor that sours the fandom for non-furries, it's several things that end up making others want to avoid us. First of all, yeah, the porn is a problem, because it is all over the internet and yes, we really do ruin everything. Also, lets not forget the time the fandom decided to sexually harass the Tony the Tiger twitter account, prompting Kellogg to tweet asking for people to stop sending inappropriate tweets to the account, because they were trying their hardest to keep things clean and child friendly.

There is another thing, we basically f**k ourselves over with how some of the fandom act. Stop flaunting that you're a furry, stop putting it all over your Facebook. The occasional drawing of your sona is fine to post, because they _are_ a part of your life, but don't go crazy about it. Furries aren't the master race, get off your high horse and wise up. It isn't a lifestyle, it isn't a way of life, it's a hobby. Being a furry is a _hobby_, so stop asking stupid questions like 'how do I come out as a furry to my parents?' or 'when is the best time to tell my friends that I'm a furry?' - there's never a best time to do it, and you don't come out to your parents as a furry, treating it like you're going to come out to them as gay. People are disowned and hated and killed for being gay, and while some people have strong reactions to furries, it isn't that extreme. Yes, there's been bomb scares and threats, but we could have it a lot worse.

What the general public see of the furry fandom is our own faults, we mostly have ourselves to blame, along with the dark and nasty twist the media put on the fandom. The fandom has done a lot of good like raising countless amounts of money for charity and helping bring awareness to illnesses and problems, but then every other year a well known fursuiter is exposed as a pedophile or a danger to society, and those labels get smeared over the rest of us. It's a very rocky and off-putting road, but the good things that are a part of the community are what keep the rest of us here.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 12, 2017)

An interesting article:

www.psychologytoday.com: What’s the Deal with “Furries?”



> Misconceptions abound about furries, with media articles routinely mischaracterizing them as fetishists or as psychologically dysfunctional people. Many such misconceptions are demonstrably false, borne often out of a lack of clear understanding about what, exactly, furries do as a group. For example, the misconception that furries are people who obtain sexual gratification from wearing mascot-style fursuits stems from the fact that that a small percentage of furries – approximately 20 percent—do manifest their fanship through costuming. However, as with other fan communities (e.g., video game convention attendees, anime cosplayers, sports fans who wear their team’s jersey), such costuming is rarely done for the purpose of sexual gratification, and is almost always done as a form of self-expression or performance. And, like other fandoms, one’s interest in furry can manifest in a variety of ways: drawing or commissioning furry-themed artwork and writing, playing furry-themed games, costuming and performing, and gathering with others who share one’s interest.





Simo said:


> I dunno. I don't really care what people think about the porn.
> 
> I mean, my God...look at the expolsive popularity of those corny books and movies in that '50 Shades of Grey' series. Furries are a huge improvement, over that, anyday : P
> 
> ...



I don't have a problem with too much. I do have some requirements. Be responsible about your fetish, don't throw it at people who don't appreciate it, and try not to cast other furries in a negative light. American society doesn't allow for too much conversation about sex, still, despite 50 Shades of Domestic Abuse's success.


----------



## Yakamaru (Nov 12, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> 50 Shades of Domestic Abuse


That fucking name. xD






Good gracious lord. I need to stop hitting the forum for a couple. I keep laughing my ass off.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 12, 2017)

Simo said:


> Well, maybe it can be on the Discovery channel. We'll be famous!


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 12, 2017)

Yakamaru said:


> That fucking name. xD
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I can't take credit for it - my furry pen pal came up with it.


----------



## Simo (Nov 12, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> Yet rare is the person who doesn't secretly giggle and watch the Discovery channel with 100% pure intentions



It is curious that whatever animal the show is about, they mate at some point. One thing I noted that it's one time when you can get shots of fast moving animals being (relatively) still, and not running about. So there's a certain practical aspect to it: I've noted that with certain animals, say, The Fossa, it's hard to get shots of them, as they move so fast, so most any documentary footage I've seen, they're mating, or in some stage of competing to.

Oh, and yes, I did giggle.

And I think David Attenborough did, too. : )


----------



## ResolutionBlaze (Nov 12, 2017)

Simo said:


> Well, maybe it can be on the Discovery channel. We'll be famous!



"The Goat/Wolf hybrid is attempting to woo the skunk, while at the same time avoiding any sudden movements so as to not get sprayed."


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 12, 2017)

ResolutionBlaze said:


> "The Goat/Wolf hybrid is attempting to woo the skunk, while at the same time avoiding any sudden movements so as to not get sprayed."



Isn't something like this the basis for Pepe la Pew or whatever?


----------



## TwizztedDragon (Nov 12, 2017)

i think the non furrys are just jealous that a hot furry stole their wife or husband. Because i see alot more sexy and beautiful furrys than normal women and men. So i think it's just jealousy.  But the biggest concern i have is if your proud too be your self, why do you even care what people think about what you do and who you are. Love you for you nd thats all that matters.


----------



## P_Dragon (Nov 12, 2017)

Yakamaru said:


> Some of the most socially inept people I've ever met are Furries. I would argue that there's a correlation between the two.


I believe it. 
I find it tragically amusing how social ineptitude can cause so many issues for folks, so long as it doesn't result in anything heinous or violent. Case in point: My whole life lol


----------



## Fuzzylumkin (Nov 14, 2017)

I'm sure everyone has touched base on this already, but I didn't feel like reading all the previous replies so im going to just throw my two cents in.

Thanks to a combination of various media outlets, such as CSI, the Tyra Banks Show, and general stupidity, the furry community has definitely been drug through the mud, if you ask anyone on the street what a furry is, they are going to tell you its a sex thing, and yea.. for some people it is, however that is a small sliver of the fandom, just like any other fandom has their kinks, but because of those few media debacles, other things have caused issues.. a murder happens, oh look he was a furry. Pedo rapes a child, he was a furry. we are definitely a very misunderstood fandom.

But with all bad things, comes good, thanks to the positive members of our community, we are loved in places like pittsburg where anthrocon is held yearly, and we are as a community healing. Yes, occasionally we have setbacks, but that's not a furry thing.. that is a HUMAN thing. And as much as none of us WANT to be human, sadly, we can not yet change that... so we press on, we try to make a good name for ourselves, we try to show the normies that we are not sex crazed pedos, we do what we can to be good and kind to each other. We need to show the rest of the world that under our suits, we're MOSTLY good people, being behind our suits or our masks, or costumes, whatever you call it, makes us more comfortable, it draws us out of our shells.

What those normies, muggles, whatever do not understand... is it takes a ton of courage to put on a dog suit and go out into public, it takes a lot of guts to smile and face the world while sweating balls in a dragon suit, and do our best to make people happy, to dance and play, knowing how the world judges us, and yet, still doing what we love to do. Furries are some of the most courageous people in the world, and fursuiters are my heroes! I can not wait to eventually get a full suit and join them!

The world is an ugly, horrible, hate filled, selfish place, but being a furry makes it a little bit brighter for me.


----------



## TheArchiver (Nov 14, 2017)

.....Another one of these threads?

Has the obvious answer not been made abundantly clear the last several hundred times this topic has been dredged up?


----------



## Baalf (Nov 14, 2017)

TheArchiver said:


> .....Another one of these threads?
> 
> Has the obvious answer not been made abundantly clear the last several hundred times this topic was has been dredged up?



There IS no answer: just opinions of what the answer is.


----------



## TheArchiver (Nov 14, 2017)

BennyJackdaw said:


> There IS no answer: just opinions of what the answer is.


No. The fandom is rather outwardly gross.


----------



## Ginza (Nov 14, 2017)

BennyJackdaw said:


> There IS no answer: just opinions of what the answer is.




Nah, I'd say we all can generally see why. Why a group is hated isn't usually a mystery


----------



## Baalf (Nov 14, 2017)

TheArchiver said:


> No. The fandom is rather outwardly gross.



What is "gross," though? IMO, what happened at Rain-Furrest, yes, THAT is gross. Stuff like fetishes and NSFW art, IMO, is weird, but more or less is harmless. No, we're not perfect, but I do not believe we are as bad as you or Yakamaru make us out to be.


----------



## TheArchiver (Nov 14, 2017)

BennyJackdaw said:


> I do not believe we are as bad as you or Yakamaru make us out to be.


 
No. We absolutely are. 
I've listed several reasons why in a thread that was haphazardly hidden.
The stigma is deserved.


----------



## Ginza (Nov 14, 2017)

BennyJackdaw said:


> What is "gross," though? IMO, what happened at Rain-Furrest, yes, THAT is gross. Stuff like fetishes and NSFW art, IMO, is weird, but more or less is harmless. No, we're not perfect, but I do not believe we are as bad as you or Yakamaru make us out to be.



Nobody makes it out to be bad. Some of us however, point out bullshit and weirdness when we see it. you can like whatever you want, just keep it out of real life. 

A quote I like 

"What you do on your own time is just fine, I just never want to know"


----------



## Crimcyan (Nov 14, 2017)

Well here's today's shit show...


----------



## TheArchiver (Nov 14, 2017)

Ginza said:


> Nah, I'd say we all can generally see why. Why a group is hated isn't usually a mystery




Self identified gamers are unabashedly hostile and toxic.

Weeaboos are uncultured manchildren with a fetish for contemporary Japan or rather a nauseatingly romanticized misunderstanding of it.

And furries are very wildly disgusting in their sexual expression, unwarranted sexual advances, and copius despicable social habits.

It is not difficult, correct.


----------



## Ginza (Nov 14, 2017)

TheArchiver said:


> Self identified gamers are unabashedly hostile and toxic.
> 
> Weeaboos are uncultured manchildren with a fetish for contemporary Japan or rather a nauseatingly romanticized misunderstanding of it.
> 
> ...



Well said xx ain't nothing wrong with it, just can't pretend it's not weird


----------



## TheArchiver (Nov 14, 2017)

Ginza said:


> Well said xx ain't nothing wrong with it, just can't pretend it's not weird



It transcends being weird in many cases. Though weird has it's own thresholds and spectrums that can extend into areas that should not be tolerated. Furries breach this threshold often.
I would say they are quite comparable to "hardcore" gamers. Not in specific actions but in their actions _specifically_ being linked back to their respective fandom.

For example: Star Wars BattleFront 2 (2017) is being accused of enforcing a pay to win business model. In response, gamers have sent death threats and targeted harassment campaigns to a single EA developer.

The furry equivalent is the recent arrest of a Renton man who raped his therapy dog in his fursuit.


----------



## Open_Mind (Nov 14, 2017)

Fuzzylumkin said:


> The world is an ugly, horrible, hate filled, selfish place, but being a furry makes it a little bit brighter for me.


Thank you, Thank you. *Yes!*


----------



## JustSomeDude84 (Nov 14, 2017)

BennyJackdaw said:


> What is "gross," though? IMO, what happened at Rain-Furrest, yes, THAT is gross. Stuff like fetishes and NSFW art, IMO, is weird, but more or less is harmless. No, we're not perfect, but I do not believe we are as bad as you or Yakamaru make us out to be.


A lot of things that are weird but harmless are often seen by the public as depraved or "gateways" to damnable things, even when they are not. Whether or not the fandom deserves that taboo (personally, I think it is too collectivizing to be deserved), it is difficult to remove it when extreme examples are the primary examples being published.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 14, 2017)

TheArchiver said:


> Self identified gamers are unabashedly hostile and toxic.
> 
> Weeaboos are uncultured manchildren with a fetish for contemporary Japan or rather a nauseatingly romanticized misunderstanding of it.
> 
> ...



Overgeneralize much?


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 14, 2017)

TheArchiver said:


> It transcends being weird in many cases. Though weird has it's own thresholds and spectrums that can extend into areas that should not be tolerated. Furries breach this threshold often.
> I would say they are quite comparable to "hardcore" gamers. Not in specific actions but in their actions _specifically_ being linked back to their respective fandom.
> 
> For example: Star Wars BattleFront 2 (2017) is being accused of enforcing a pay to win business model. In response, gamers have sent death threats and targeted harassment campaigns to a single EA developer.
> ...



Fallacy of small sample size and false equivalency. If your last statement has any merit, then the stories I see in the UK where oddballs have had intercourse with horses _clearly _means Brits are perverts.


----------



## JustSomeDude84 (Nov 14, 2017)

TheArchiver said:


> It transcends being weird in many cases. Though weird has it's own thresholds and spectrums that can extend into areas that should not be tolerated. Furries breach this threshold often.
> I would say they are quite comparable to "hardcore" gamers. Not in specific actions but in their actions _specifically_ being linked back to their respective fandom.
> 
> For example: Star Wars BattleFront 2 (2017) is being accused of enforcing a pay to win business model. In response, gamers have sent death threats and targeted harassment campaigns to a single EA developer.
> ...


Extreme examples exist in all walks of life. You can literally google a fandom name, combined with a crime, and you'll see an article about the two being connected. I just typed in Star Wars and murder, and an article about a Star Wars fan killing his wife over his toy collection appeared as a top result. Whether it's an exaggerated article or not, the public is very quick to associate uncommon interests with crimes.

There are bad examples in the fandom, but personally I think those people would have been bad no matter what they associated with.


----------



## ChromaticRabbit (Nov 14, 2017)

moo moo who who said:


> when someone says they are a Furry, there is a negative connotation to it?


I don't believe this is generally the case. Most people haven't really heard of the fandom and don't know a whole lot about it. Usually when they encounter it, it's either delightful, weird, or both. How they respond to new things (fear? attraction?) is a part of that. There are certainly those who do disparage the fandom, and they wish there were a general negative connotation for it. They may even try to promote that negative idea generally outside the fandom community, but that seems a bit hollow to me.


----------



## JJPaw (Nov 16, 2017)

From my observation of the fandom. The furries who represent the fandom are more of the outcast, sex-crazed, untamed and somewhat immature bunch. The more matured furries stay back and continue to allow letting the artwork, fundraising and down to earth attitude represent the fandom. Well, whenever the media inches toward the fandom, the immature furries stood up loud and proud. "Are you guys really all about the sex?" The media asked. "YAH! WE'RE TOTALLY INTO IT! CHECK OUT MY COMMISSION DONE ABOUT MY INFLATION FETISH!" one furry could say. "I LIKE PUBLIC SEX!!" another furry spouts out.

So it'd be, the media has their encyclopedic entry of what the fandom is all about the more the wrong sources are heard from. As we know about the media, they don't let stuff simply die. It's carried on, spread about and heard by all of the other fandoms and furries are subjected to a hate plague that's still with us today.

And the sex-crazed nutters champion themselves as the speakers for the fandom. On one hand, the media is an incredibly damaging tyrant of reckless information. But on the other hand, I'd wish the fandom got more better coverage though the efforts to clean up the fandom from the sploogefest a night ago, comes back again when a ounce of respect to the fandom is rewarded. The circle goes on forever like this.


----------



## perkele (Nov 16, 2017)

Because if you're the sort of person to tell people about it, you tell people about it _all the time._ All the time, forever. And it reeks of obsessive escapism.


----------



## Inkblooded (Nov 16, 2017)

Log onto FurAffinity with SFW mode turned off and you have your answer.
Really, it's not hard to understand, and that prejudice is justified.


----------



## Simo (Nov 16, 2017)

This debate is one I've seen for a good decade, and I think it boils down to how much a person cares what others think of them. Me, I know I'm a pretty decent person, who believes in helping others, and if people find some of my interests odd, well, it's not gonna shake how I feel about myself, or being associated with the furry fandom.

I'm reminded of reading the psychologist Fritz Perls in college, and his one quote:

"I do my thing and you do your thing.
I am not in this world to live up to your expectations,
And you are not in this world to live up to mine.
You are you, and I am I,
and if by chance we find each other, it's beautiful.
If not, it can't be helped."

(Fritz Perls, "Gestalt Therapy Verbatim", 1969)

_Ego, Hunger and Aggression_ is also a great book he wrote, earlier...bit more academic, but I think he had some keen insights.


----------



## KimberVaile (Nov 16, 2017)

I never understood why furries so vehemently desired to be accepted by the mainstream. Furraffintiy is full of commissioned sexual content, even the SFW stuff usually has some sort of carnal desire motivating it.  It's due to the inherently sexual nature of furries more than anything that the mainstream frowns on us, and understandably so. A sexual attraction to anthropomorphic animals is pretty weird, there really isn't any way around it. Though, I'm pretty at peace with it really, it doesn't really bother me too much. Though in that same breath, I'm not going to shout publicly about it, that's weird as fuck and it is for the best that the fandom and mainstream society remained separated.

Besides that, does it really matter if mainstream society accepts the fandom? The same society that thinks Brad Pitt's dating life is newsworthy and having entire industries dedicated to celebrity culture? For all the cringe the Fandom can be, what you're desperately trying to appeal to is hardly the pinnacle of acceptable, logical and decent. As far as I am concerned the respective cringe of the fandom and mainstream society is better off not becoming intertwined.


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (Nov 16, 2017)

Because God is just as real as vaccines causing autism
Remember! Bible states that worshipping half human/animal is sinful and forbidden and you will DEFINITELY burn in hell for that!



KimberVaile said:


> -Snip-


Humans have pack animal instincts. It's only natural that we seek acceptance from the rest. Though you are correct, furries should never try to get mixed up with the mainstream.


----------



## KimberVaile (Nov 16, 2017)

Mikazuki Marazhu said:


> Because God is just as real as vaccines causing autism
> Remember! Bible states that worshipping half human/animal is sinful and forbidden and you will DEFINITELY burn in hell for that!
> 
> 
> Humans have pack animal instincts. It's only natural that we seek acceptance from the rest. Though you are correct, furries should never try to get mixed up with the mainstream.



It's wired in our brain to try and emulate those who we view as successful, which ideally, would be people with actual merit/accomplish something meaningful for society. You know, like scientists, medical professionals, or successful business leaders/economists with actual integrity in lieu of people who play pretend for a living.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 16, 2017)

Mikazuki Marazhu said:


> Because God is just as real as vaccines causing autism
> Remember! Bible states that worshipping half human/animal is sinful and forbidden and you will DEFINITELY burn in hell for that!



Oops.  Oh well, hopefully they have cookies in hell. Someone bury my body with some spare Freon, too!


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 17, 2017)

KimberVaile said:


> I never understood why furries so vehemently desired to be accepted by the mainstream. Furraffintiy is full of commissioned sexual content, even the SFW stuff usually has some sort of carnal desire motivating it.  It's due to the inherently sexual nature of furries more than anything that the mainstream frowns on us, and understandably so. A sexual attraction to anthropomorphic animals is pretty weird, there really isn't any way around it. Though, I'm pretty at peace with it really, it doesn't really bother me too much. Though in that same breath, I'm not going to shout publicly about it, that's weird as fuck and it is for the best that the fandom and mainstream society remained separated.
> 
> Besides that, does it really matter if mainstream society accepts the fandom? The same society that thinks Brad Pitt's dating life is newsworthy and having entire industries dedicated to celebrity culture? For all the cringe the Fandom can be, what you're desperately trying to appeal to is hardly the pinnacle of acceptable, logical and decent. As far as I am concerned the respective cringe of the fandom and mainstream society is better off not becoming intertwined.



I agree. Screw mainstream society.


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (Nov 17, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> I agree. Screw mainstream society.


Screw normies
Free Kekistan
Join /pol/


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 17, 2017)

Mikazuki Marazhu said:


> Screw normies
> Free Kekistan
> Join /pol/



No thanks.


----------



## -Sliqq- (Nov 18, 2017)

:-(


----------



## pineapplepizza (Nov 18, 2017)

-Sliqq- said:


> :-(



How do I erase this from my memory


----------



## Lexiand (Nov 19, 2017)

-Sliqq- said:


> :-(



*Sigh*

Why did they think this is a good idea.


----------



## Crimcyan (Nov 19, 2017)

-Sliqq- said:


> :-(


----------



## Lexiand (Nov 19, 2017)

Also I think what really hit the wall for us
was the fur and loathing episode from CSI


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 19, 2017)

SveltColt said:


> Also I think what really hit the wall for us
> was the fur and loathing episode from CSI



Ugh. 

Fur and Loathing - Wikipedia


----------



## ChromaticRabbit (Nov 19, 2017)

SveltColt said:


> (Youtube: "All The Single  Furries")
> *Sigh*
> 
> Why did they think this is a good idea.








You should consider how that this was an anti-fandom video, and not a bad fandom video. It was the sole video posted by a certain "Stinky Skusky" account. I mean, this isn't exactly subtle work, is it.

You really should consider this an object lesson in the depravity of people so phenomenally insecure that they look for what feels to them as if they must be easy targets to disparage and then they go at it. A splendid monument to their worthless contempt? I suppose 1.2M youtubers all know exactly what sort of spirit posted this. Well almost all.

See, it bugs me that people would stumble across such low-production anti-fandom memes as this and not immediately see it as the cowardly dis that it obviously always was. It's funny, I'm fairly sure it's because people must be so self-loathing that they just passively accept the cringeworthiness as 'plausible' despite even a cursory look at the context suggesting something else entirely. I'm fairly sure the selfsame spirit that made the video is also at work trying to produce both ends of this, maybe even promote the very bad memes in proximity to the fandom so that they can mock those too.

Endless jest until someone wakes up and grows a clue, or the culture of the community evolves to something collectively superior to three smarmy Internet jackasses.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 19, 2017)

For some reason I can't watch the video right now. It keeps giving me a general error. Might be my internet connection...


----------



## W00lies (Nov 19, 2017)

I don't think anyone knows what a furry is around here unless they are part of an online art community.


----------



## Shoiyo (Nov 19, 2017)

My guess is that people frown upon furries because of a deep-seeded territorial instinct in the lower monkey-section of the brain that says, 

"Animal person = strange.

strange = bad. 

Animal person = bad." 

That's the human brain for you. It invented the iPhone, but still thinks in stone-age ways.


----------



## Jay98 (Nov 19, 2017)

People draw conclusions quickly based on little evidence if they haven't the time or interest to invest further. therefore the most outwardly evidence is taken as God's word. the most outwardly evidence of furries is pornography. that is because the outward evidence of any creative medium is pornography. 1, because it's a very popular interest and 2, because it's well distributed. this is why porn is often the first thing to appear in a search engine. do humans then assume that all humans are only interested in human pornography and no other concept? of course they don't. that's because people derive all means of things other than what we associate with from evidence. humans assume humans are not so highly sex driven because they know they don't think about the concept as often as the evidence is easy to find. but furries are not human so they are not them humans draw a conclusion based on an outside experience. i too have fallen into the trap of believing all humans are perverts. i'm not often wrong.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 19, 2017)

Shoiyo said:


> My guess is that people frown upon furries because of a deep-seeded territorial instinct in the lower monkey-section of the brain that says,
> 
> "Animal person = strange.
> 
> ...



Yeah, but people don't think it's strange when people work WITH animals. They just think it's strange when people dress up and act like animals. And I think that's especially true in this country, where the dominant religion has an inherent dislike of nature - animal nature, human nature, nature in general. Nature is sinful - don't emulate it!


----------



## Inkblooded (Nov 19, 2017)

I already said pornography but I forgot to mention drama.
People generally don't like furries because they overreact to everything, much like a spoiled child with severe neurological issues.
Most furries feel entitled to everything and throw a tantrum when something doesn't go exactly as they planned.
They also take different opinions as a personal offense. Seriously, people have acted like I've murdered their family because I said I hate femboy art.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 19, 2017)

Inkblooded said:


> I already said pornography but I forgot to mention drama.
> People generally don't like furries because they overreact to everything, much like a spoiled child with severe neurological issues.
> Most furries feel entitled to everything and throw a tantrum when something doesn't go exactly as they planned.
> They also take different opinions as a personal offense. Seriously, people have acted like I've murdered their family because I said I hate femboy art.



No, people got upset because you said femboys were basically sexist neo Nazis. Saying you dislike femboy art is entirely different from what you actually said.


----------



## Inkblooded (Nov 19, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> No, people got upset because you said femboys were basically sexist neo Nazis. Saying you dislike femboy art is entirely different from what you actually said.



Ah, here we have an example specimen...!!!

When did I ever say femboy are Nazis? No. I never did. Do not put words in my mouth.


----------



## Water Draco (Nov 19, 2017)

Normally I would puff fire but in this instance could I suggest not going down that path again.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 19, 2017)

Inkblooded said:


> Ah, here we have an example specimen...!!!
> 
> When did I ever say femboy are Nazis? No. I never did. Do not put words in my mouth.



Main point is you insult people and groups of people and then pretend it's their fault for getting offended instead of takin responsibility for your attitude.


----------



## Inkblooded (Nov 19, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> Main point is you insult people and groups of people and then pretend it's their fault for getting offended instead of takin responsibility for your attitude.



That has nothing to do with Nazis.
And theres nothing wrong with "insulting" (Aka saying I don't like) discriminatory groups.

Thanks for being a living example though. My point has been proven...


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 19, 2017)

Inkblooded said:


> That has nothing to do with Nazis.
> And theres nothing wrong with "insulting" (Aka saying I don't like) discriminatory groups.
> 
> Thanks for being a living example though. My point has been proven...



On the contrary. I'm only pointing out the obvious. Carry on.


----------



## Inkblooded (Nov 19, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> On the contrary. I'm only pointing out the obvious. Carry on.



LOL, you are indeed


----------



## -..Legacy..- (Nov 19, 2017)

That topic is under the bridge, and probably doesn't need revisited again here.   Its too easy to move on.


----------



## Akartoshi (Nov 19, 2017)

What about you two get the hell back on topic? Inkblooded has a point. There is drama in the fandom. BaghDaddy also has a point. It seems like your dislike for femboys is out of proportion. Another thing that has a point is this thread. Last time I checked, it wasn't to start whinging again. Both of you stop being an example answer to the threads question and answer it instead.


----------



## Inkblooded (Nov 19, 2017)

Akartoshi said:


> What about you two get the hell back on topic? Inkblooded has a point. There is drama in the fandom. BaghDaddy also has a point. It seems like your dislike for fembody is out of proportion. Another thing that has a point is this thread. Last time I checked, it wasn't to start whinging again. Both of you stop being an example answer to the threads question and answer it instead.



???



> fembody



No, I said I dislike femboy. Female body is fine ♥


----------



## Akartoshi (Nov 19, 2017)

To answer the question:

I think that firstly; It's simply not considered normal. Most people probably view it as some variation of zoophilia. Once society makes up their mind, you aren't going to change it. They constantly degrade the fandom at every chance, highlighting events to further their hate. Only the bad sides are shown on the media because it's what people want to see. This keeps continuing, branding furries as something disgusting. Also, as Yakamaru said, there are a lot of people in the fandom who are socially awkward. Stuff like drama, immature fighting, etc. happen, which just taints the fandom's image even more.


----------



## Akartoshi (Nov 19, 2017)

Inkblooded said:


> ???
> 
> 
> 
> No, I said I dislike femboy. Female body is fine ♥


Sorry, I meant "femboys" but S is next to d on my keyboard.

This thread is asking a specific question. Don't turn it into another debate about an unrelated topic that we already discussed which ended up in a lock.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 19, 2017)

Akartoshi said:


> To answer the question:
> 
> I think that firstly; It's simply not considered normal. Most people probably view it as some variation of zoophilia. Once society makes up their mind, you aren't going to change it. They constantly degrade the fandom at every chance, highlighting events to further their hate. Only the bad sides are shown on the media because it's what people want to see. This keeps continuing, branding furries as something disgusting. Also, as Yakamaru said, there are a lot of people in the fandom who are socially awkward. Stuff like drama, immature fighting, etc. happen, which just taints the fandom's image even more.



Honestly I don't see this sort of hate directed at furries. I isn't even know about the furry community until I deliberately looked into the community behind anthropomorphic art on DA and FA. I'm really not even a furry beyond the fact that I like the art and the crowd seems easy for me to fit into. 

And honestly immature fighting can often be endearing to people. It's another "oh, look, dysfunctional geeks" moment for "regular" people. By "regular people" I mean anyone who's not a furry. 

Another aspect is that furries tend to be young, and young people are extremely less religious and more sexually open and accepting than their older peers. And that's very obvious with furries. 

But honestly I don't think you have anywhere near the bad press that you think you have. Sometimes bad press is good press! Turn it into an opportunity to endear yourselves and don't take anything too seriously. (Unless people start chasing you with pitchforks - in that case run.)


----------



## Inkblooded (Nov 19, 2017)

Oh also because there's a lot of gay furries who push it into other's faces, I think that drives people away too.
I am homophobic, I don't attack gay men but I don't like it when people are overly obsessed with it and think being gay is everything about them as a person.
And I know a lot of people are not comfortable with gay content.


----------



## Akartoshi (Nov 19, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> Honestly I don't see this sort of hate directed at furries. I isn't even know about the furry community until I deliberately looked into the community behind anthropomorphic art on DA and FA. I'm really not even a furry beyond the fact that I like the art and the crowd seems easy for me to fit into.
> 
> And honestly immature fighting can often be endearing to people. It's another "oh, look, dysfunctional geeks" moment for "regular" people. By "regular people" I mean anyone who's not a furry.
> 
> ...


Most of the information I get is from online news sites. In real life, I never knew much about furries either, but online, it's the topic that everyone gets to throw eggs at.


----------



## Akartoshi (Nov 19, 2017)

For those who are about to start another argument: please don't fall for the bait. Don't even bother. You won't accomplish anything by taking it, so just move on with your day


----------



## Inkblooded (Nov 19, 2017)

Akartoshi said:


> For those who are about to start another argument: please don't fall for the bait. Don't even bother. You won't accomplish anything by taking it, so just move on with your day



 The femboy thing has been dropped. What are you talking about?


----------



## silveredgreen (Nov 19, 2017)

Inkblooded said:


> Oh also because there's a lot of gay furries who push it into other's faces, I think that drives people away too.
> I am homophobic, I don't attack gay men but I don't like it when people are overly obsessed with it and think being gay is everything about them as a person.
> And I know a lot of people are not comfortable with gay content.



That's not being homophobic, that's being rightfully annoyed at the loud minority of gay people who act like assholes. There are a lot of people who hate those guys, some of em happen to be gay as well.


----------



## Jay98 (Nov 19, 2017)

it's quite refreshing to not be the guy causing arguments.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Nov 19, 2017)

Akartoshi said:


> For those who are about to start another argument: please don't fall for the bait. Don't even bother. You won't accomplish anything by taking it, so just move on with your day



Yeah, that last homophobic comment was just asking for it.


----------



## Filter (Nov 20, 2017)

We're a motley crew of nerds, geeks, freaks, artists, and others who aren't mainstream for one reason or another. Even if we're otherwise successful, well-adjusted, attractive, and/or athletic. If I had to guess, I'd say on average we're somewhat more imaginative, open to different perspectives, and maybe even brighter than the norm. These are positive traits, but they can attract negative attention from the kind of normies who insist on everyone being just like them. Simply put, we're a little different, and that makes some people uncomfortable.

Also, given that we're used to being misunderstood, we're apt to go to the other extreme and become overly accepting of a fringe element that, in turn, makes the fandom look bad. I'm not talking about furry lifestylers or even yiff (both of which can be handled in mature ways), but zoophiles, trolls who are mostly in it for the drama, the bad apples that get conventions closed etc.


----------



## Mikazuki Marazhu (Nov 20, 2017)

Filter said:


> Also, given that we're used to being misunderstood, we're apt to go to the other extreme and become overly accepting of a fringe element that, in turn, makes the fandom look bad.



We did a pretty good job dishing out pedo and zoos

Nevermind, I forgot I'm in "FURAFFINITY" forums


----------



## KimberVaile (Nov 20, 2017)

Hahaha, oh my god that meme.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Nov 20, 2017)

Knock it off with the bickering. Do not make me tell you again.

I personally disagree with the underlying premise of this thread, and I've expanded on why in another similar thread some time ago, but the people who want to discuss the topic should be able to do so without some of you derailing the thread for the sake of your own pet peeves. If this pattern of behavior continues I will start handing out thread bans.


----------



## dogryme6 (Dec 5, 2017)

I'm a firestarter! Twisted firestarter! You're a firestarter, twisted firestarter!

In all seriousness, I'm sure it's pretty freaking obvious. But to elaborate further...
Furries are people with an interest in anthropomorphized animals. People think that basic interest is weird.
The problem is exacerbated by those who are obsessed and fanatic about their interest. Depraveds and degenerates want their porn and fetish art, (I'm certainly not helping with that, and I'm autistic too. I'm not helping ANYONE just by BEING here.) With such things becoming too overly common in the fandom, along with the occasional actual horse fornicater or other perverse sexual deviant whom attracts the attention of the news through their despicable actions, should you be any kind of surprised at all?
For all the good that furries do the bad things are twice as publicized. One of several reasons why I want mainstream news to completely fall apart, but that's a topic for another day.


----------



## Sagt (Dec 5, 2017)

I'm going to say it again: Furries overreact about the perception outsiders have of this fandom. Many people don't even know what a furry is or are indifferent to us; and online we're a dead meme.



dogryme6 said:


> I'm a firestarter! Twisted firestarter! You're a firestarter, twisted firestarter!
> 
> In all seriousness, I'm sure it's pretty freaking obvious. But to elaborate further...
> Furries are people with an interest in anthropomorphized animals. People think that basic interest is weird.
> ...


Are you calling yourself a depraved degenerate? ._.

If you care about the perception others have of this fandom, and you're not fond of how some people view it, I'd think a good idea would be to alter your language. Sure, of the people who dislike furries, I'd agree that the sexual stuff is probably what turns them away, but validating the idea that those things are despicable or immoral isn't exactly helping. That kind of prudishness is what makes furries noteworthy in the first place.

As for the furries who happen to be criminals, I don't think this should be raising eyebrows. They're an extreme anomaly, and they aren't exclusive to the fandom; there are nasty people everywhere. Maybe we have a few more of those sorts here than elsewhere (don't know if we do, in truth, and neither should you), but I'd hardly attribute that a result of being a furry, so it's not worth mentioning.


----------



## dogryme6 (Dec 5, 2017)

Lcs said:


> I'm going to say it again: Furries overreact about the perception outsiders have of this fandom. Many people don't even know what a furry is or are indifferent to us; and online we're a dead meme.
> 
> 
> Are you calling yourself a depraved degenerate? ._.
> ...


No. When I said people want their porn And fetish art? I wasn't putting the both of them together, I was trying to keep them separate from eachother. I'll just be straight up about one thing, I hate NSFW porn with fully out and open genitals and private parts. I'm extremely prudish of That. I'm calling myself that because of the other thing.
That aside I wish the perception of the fandom Wasn't an issue. But because it is I have to worry about it. And I value truth. The conclusion is, I tell it like it is, and that doesn't help anyone. I don't help anyone, I just screw up like I usually do. And that's just how it goes!
I guess those kinds of people, there's no logic to them at all so they shouldn't be attributed to anything... 
I'm still stubbornly sticking to my guns about the whole News Media Needs to Go thing.


----------



## Lunar Man (Dec 6, 2017)

Furries, bronies? Why are we hated?
Because a lot of furries and bronies are degenerates.

Lack social skills, spergs, sexual deviants, extreme toxicity, emotional immaturity, etc.
When's the last time you heard of a Trekkie, or a Star Wars fan do anything as controversial as we have? There's clearly something
about about being a brony or a furry that attracts, and/or creates degeneracy.


----------



## lupi900 (Dec 6, 2017)

Lunar Man said:


> Furries, bronies? Why are we hated?
> Because a lot of furries and bronies are degenerates.
> 
> Lack social skills, spergs, sexual deviants, extreme toxicity, emotional immaturity, etc.
> ...



Or its because non-furs are just assholes looking for a excuse to rage at us. Not a because of anything your saying, which frankly just reads as edgy excuse to go that were stunted nerds which is ironic since this said by furry/mlp fan.


----------



## MetroFox2 (Dec 6, 2017)

Lunar Man said:


> When's the last time you heard of a Trekkie, or a Star Wars fan do anything as controversial



Mate, have you seen the Star Wars Christmas special? That's a sin against just about all known things.

Also, I must disagree on terms that a lot of it comes from the public knowledge of more infamous events, like a certain rainfurrest, as well as the natural human response to dislike anything that's different. In fact I'd have to question the idea that there are a lot of degenerates on here, because I've found that it's one of the rare places on the internet where most conversations I've had, haven't descended into bickering. Of course there are some exceptions, but at least it feels more sane around here than most other places.

Yeah, there are degenerates here, maybe not as many as you're implying, but there are degenerates everywhere, look at the whole recent thing on YouTube with pedos and that sort of stuff.


----------



## Simo (Dec 6, 2017)

Also, take a look at Washington, and politicians, and the amount of groping and unwanted sexual advances that go on there; you have men groping 14 year old girls, still running for office, and getting endorsed by the President, who has himself went on about how women like to be groped.  ( "Grab 'em by the pussy!") And there's a host of people in both parties, too long to list here, who have crossed the lines more so than furries, by abusing their positions of power and trust.

No, this so called, 'degeneracy' is not all confined to the furry fandom; it's something that even those charged with being leaders and setting examples have in spades. At least with furries, the more exotic interests are in the realm of fantasy and play, and there doesn't appear to be nearly such a huge problem with actual sexual assault.

If you wanna see degeneracy, look at the White House, look at Congress...the furries have _nothing_ on what goes down in Washington, DC.


----------



## -..Legacy..- (Dec 6, 2017)

Judging tens of thousands, by the actions of a few, is rather silly.


----------



## MetroFox2 (Dec 6, 2017)

-..Legacy..- said:


> Judging tens of thousands, by the actions of a few, is rather silly.



Yet its the laziest, and therefore, the most desirable option. Subconsciously that is, most of us can go against our natural inclinations, most do, some don't, others can't.


----------



## Yakamaru (Dec 6, 2017)

Lunar Man said:


> Furries, bronies? Why are we hated?
> Because a lot of furries and bronies are degenerates.
> 
> Lack social skills, spergs, sexual deviants, extreme toxicity, emotional immaturity, etc.
> ...


In-group/out-group mentality and relations/dynamics. Those who lack self-awareness tend to be ignored by the rest of the in-group because of an explicit in-group bias. Which is why we see so much degeneracy in the fandom. This year's MFF had shit going on, and it's slowly spreading. Other Furries ignore, sometimes accept shit like zoophilia in the fandom, not to mention the sexually deviant. 

I give zero fucks if you're a fellow Furry. If you decide to fuck in public or do drugs(or other degenerate crap for that matter) at a con I will call you out on this socially unacceptable behaviour. Your actions are giving the rest of us who have an ounce of common sense a bad rep, whether intentionally or not. 



-..Legacy..- said:


> Judging tens of thousands, by the actions of a few, is rather silly.


It is silly, but it's how we socially work. When you see enough crap going on with one specific group you will see people start associating that crap with that group. Whether you want/like it or not.

And lets be honest here. A decent amount of Furries are tribalistic. One of the reasons AltFurries are becoming more numerous every day. We are sick of this garbage. Sick of tribalism, sick of herd mentality. Sick of political correctness and identity politics. Sick of degeneracy and socially unacceptable behaviour going unacknowledged and the people responsible not being called out and forced to take responsibility for their actions.

A decent amount of Furries lack self-awareness. I am seeing it on these forums. I see it on Twatter. I see it on Discord. If you and/or a group you are part of get ostracized, there is most likely a reason for it.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 7, 2017)

Simo said:


> If you wanna see degeneracy, look at the White House, look at Congress...the furries have _nothing_ on what goes down in Washington, DC.



This. If you think people drawing fluffy porn, but have no problem with voting for a "soft" pedophile, well, there's something wrong with you.

A more logically consistent stance is being against all sexual "degeneracies." However, these types of people usually believe that nothing is morally permissible except sex for reproduction in the missionary position, which actually seems _to create _more perversions. I'm much happier with people drawing weird fetish art than trying to practice it on physical entities.


----------



## Ciderfine (Dec 16, 2017)

Because we don't control our members when they do horrible things and try to clean up the act. The fandom is like the failed PR stunts of a communist country. People in animal suits seen with bad news, creepys news, horrible news. Repeat said cycle: that is us today.

If the fandom wants to be taken seriously it has to purge, remove and kick out the degenerative members who do illegal things. But since the fandom is treated like an open safe safari nation for all, all category of creeps can walk in this borderless community and treated with endless "Hip hip hoorays" if they agree with us on one thing.

This is a hobby cult, not a community or "family" anymore.


----------



## Simo (Dec 16, 2017)

I'm just sick and tired of how we're supposed to be so Disney friendly.

Fuck that. Have fun, and it's not like I was some sexless prude, when I was young. I think freedom of the sexual imagination is liberating.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 17, 2017)

Ciderfine said:


> Because we don't control our members when they do horrible things and try to clean up the act. The fandom is like the failed PR stunts of a communist country. People in animal suits seen with bad news, creepys news, horrible news. Repeat said cycle: that is us today.
> 
> If the fandom wants to be taken seriously it has to purge, remove and kick out the degenerative members who do illegal things. But since the fandom is treated like an open safe safari nation for all, all category of creeps can walk in this borderless community and treated with endless "Hip hip hoorays" if they agree with us on one thing.
> 
> This is a hobby cult, not a community or "family" anymore.



Illegal things are illegal. Furries aren't protecting people doing illegal things I don't think. No more so than any other group by comparison.


----------



## 134 (Dec 17, 2017)

In the german Furry-Forum there was a Film producer from a well-known prime time series ("SOKO Wismar") of the second channel from the national television ("ZweitesDeutschesFernsehen" ZDF) asking if someone was interested in taking part in the next filming. SOKO Wismar is about a special comission from the police solving any murder or hard criminal delicts. After about 10 minutes the thread was opened by the producer nearly the whole forum has replied that they don't want to take part because it was about A girl who seemingly murdered her boyfriend (both donned*1 Fursuits) and everyone just said this could be CSI 2.0 so after a week the Forum Administrators replied to that thread and explained that if no real furry takes part there the producers will use any animal costume they can get! 





*Shivers*
The Admins asked the producer if he would post the plot about the show ... and he did... The important stuff was that following was ensured:
-No fetish /other sexual things
-No blood on fursuits (the fursuits for the actors were situated by one of the best german fursuit makers)
-only the best fursuits take part (not selfmade ugly things)
-no drug abuse 

About 14 fursuiters and 16 fursuits volunteered for the shooting.
(They needed so many because the plot took part on a furry convention)

About 3 weeks ago they finished the shooting and the furrys which took part reported the forum how it was:
-The furry fandom was shown in a good light*1
-No animals/fursuits were harmed
-absolutely NOTHING was like that one episode from CSI
-They had the most stunning fursuits of germany!
-the story ended well for the furrys (besides that one guy who died because he was shot by a russian guy idk why)

SOKO Wismar with the episode called "Der mit dem Wolf tanzt"  (Dances with wolves AROOOO)
will be aired in march as they told us and I will report you if that had an affect on the mainstream society.


*1*2 IDK if I got that right

*woof!*


----------



## Baalf (Dec 17, 2017)

Lunar Man said:


> Furries, bronies? Why are we hated?
> Because a lot of furries and bronies are degenerates.



Okay, I'm just going to flat out say this.

There are degenerates EVERYWHERE. Being a fan of a certain quirk, I only like said quirk by so much. But I decided to go to Deviant Art to branch out and what did I see? Over-exaggerated fat fetish art pictures. ...Of HUMANS. THAT is only if you count fetishes as the trait of a "degenerate," bit at the same time it doesn't change the fact that non furries make porn and fetish art too, Mario fanboys can be just as rabid (and usually even moreso) than Sonic fanboys, non-furries make gary stus too, and then some. Yet people only seem to zoom in on negative aspects when animal lovers and furries do it.

Truth is, in a nutshell, furries are no different than any other group of people. They just get the most attention.


----------



## lupi900 (Dec 17, 2017)

Simo said:


> I'm just sick and tired of how we're supposed to be so Disney friendly.
> 
> Fuck that. Have fun, and it's not like I was some sexless prude, when I was young. I think freedom of the sexual imagination is liberating.



I could care less what those furs think. Why should i have bow down to suit them because there thin skinned enough to care what non-furs think of us?. It's rich when they make cut & paste posts on we should ignore troll's.

But are dumb enough to go on how a lady can't show up wering a bikini because it makes us look bad.


----------



## TheFoxFreedom (Dec 17, 2017)

moo moo who who said:


> Anthropomorphic characters are literally seen everywhere in our society, from characters in Disney to mascots and such. The idea of animals with human characteristics are normalized in our society, yet when someone says they are a Furry, there is a negative connotation to it? In a sense, there really is a large population that likes anthropomorphic characters. To what extent does it take for someone to be considered a furry?


the idea of you having YOUR representation in a animal "world" sound strange.


----------



## Ciderfine (Dec 17, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> Illegal things are illegal. Furries aren't protecting people doing illegal things I don't think. No more so than any other group by comparison.




Actually the nature and siology of furries proves that they do protect troublemakers again and again. From drug abuse, destruction of property, pulling fire alarms, throwing soiled diapers onto cars, sexual assault that is never reported to the police but sent to the admins like cry baby letters proves that we are allowing it because these people are still with us and allowed to return to every big party and continue this cycle of PR malaria. By staying silent and not openling taking about it is allowing it, and not pushing for change and responsibility we are making an environment in which it its born again and again.


We don't call out bullshit and ride with it like its our normal social stance or vibe. No one has the responsibility to see "I and many others do not agree with this and are not like this." It's so simple to call out bullshit but we allow more arsonists to enter our community and set fire to events, PR, news and cause such damage yet there's no attempt to apologize or say "This is not us".

Instead of wanting to fix the issue we aim for getting more diversity on this mess of sinking ship. There are no rules, no protection or norms as of now. It's amazing what a blacklist can do, banning names or people from showing up. 

The real issue is how much illegal stuff happens and no one calls it out, reports it. You have all been brainwashed to not shame this giant "fur family" of yours like a communist church. People fear the outlash of those who wont agree with it, its a very hurtful vibe when we let these things continue naturally and don't set a standard. The media world hates yall because your vibes and lifestyles revolve around being addicts, celebrating dangerous and cringey crazy behavior, norms

When you make everyone the "Friendly hero" in the fandom because they party harder, you create the ultimate form of evil. Neglecting the norms of the society you exist in. No one wants to see this parade of issues near them at all. This is why furries are hated. They NEVER CHANGE.


----------



## Baalf (Dec 17, 2017)

Ciderfine said:


> Actually the nature and siology of furries proves that they do protect troublemakers again and again. From drug abuse, destruction of property, pulling fire alarms, throwing soiled diapers onto cars, sexual assault that is never reported to the police but sent to the admins like cry baby letters proves that we are allowing it because these people are still with us and allowed to return to every big party and continue this cycle of PR malaria. By staying silent and not openling taking about it is allowing it, and not pushing for change and responsibility we are making an environment in which it its born again and again.
> 
> 
> We don't call out bullshit and ride with it like its our normal social stance or vibe. No one has the responsibility to see "I and many others do not agree with this and are not like this." It's so simple to call out bullshit but we allow more arsonists to enter our community and set fire to events, PR, news and cause such damage yet there's no attempt to apologize or say "This is not us".
> ...



Okay, I'm going to try and read your post to make some sense out of it, since I have to admit your wording is incredibly odd, but...

The problem is, again, all walks of life do these things, yet we zoom in on furries. I think the biggest problem isn't that furries are defended by furries, but the fact that furries are DEMONIZED even by other "furries." If a furry were to set fire to someone's house, is that alright? Of course not. BUT the fact he did it has no coelation to the fact they're furries. Instead of judging people by they're actions, we're judging people by whether they're furries, which there in lies the problem IMO.

Furries are not any more in the wrong than anyone else who does awful shit, but they get the most attention, and I feel like demonization is the problem.

Also, one comment I have to make on your first paragraph, I don't feel like being furry is something that needs to be kept secret.


----------



## lupi900 (Dec 17, 2017)

Ciderfine said:


> Actually the nature and siology of furries proves that they do protect troublemakers again and again. From drug abuse, destruction of property, pulling fire alarms, throwing soiled diapers onto cars, sexual assault that is never reported to the police but sent to the admins like cry baby letters proves that we are allowing it because these people are still with us and allowed to return to every big party and continue this cycle of PR malaria. By staying silent and not openling taking about it is allowing it, and not pushing for change and responsibility we are making an environment in which it its born again and again.
> 
> 
> We don't call out bullshit and ride with it like its our normal social stance or vibe. No one has the responsibility to see "I and many others do not agree with this and are not like this." It's so simple to call out bullshit but we allow more arsonists to enter our community and set fire to events, PR, news and cause such damage yet there's no attempt to apologize or say "This is not us".
> ...



So your only proof that were trash is non-name furries that 99% of the fandom didn't know exsisted got reported by shitty mainstream news networks & 15 to 20 year' olds partying like people in that age do. 

As usual no proof or fact beyond bitter opinions on taking a hobby way to personal. I guess this is the furry version of everyone but me is the problem i see on other fandom based sites.


----------



## Ciderfine (Dec 17, 2017)

You logic reminds me of black ice, a strange dance if by taking one step but really taking several steps back on wheels of personal ownership. Furries are in the wrong by the bad they do but don't call it out and maintain a safe and open artistic standard that exists. I feel an aspect of guilty by association fills the well with honey here very good.

A sticky mess, no words only trouble. The entire issue is how "positive" everyone inside the fandom views things. Every disaster at a convention is met with laughs, giggles and more riots. Not a real logical way to repair the fractured relationship this community's existence with other places it has destroyed, ruined, trashed and hurt. Let alone the people.

We don't need everyone being happy, we need REALITY. Reality that we need to focus on the bad, remove it, stop it, fix the issues from happening to let the food chain and ecosystem niche of Good come in naturally.  There is such fake fuckery and "support" for everything in here I often feel like this is North korea by how shitfaced the PR of this place's own stance is sold as.

If we judge people by just doing bad things regardless if they are furries won't fix the issue. Instead sheds light by saying "oh we're not bad" end of story.
The fandom has to take responsibility by calling out furries and people as being both, cutting out and part of the equation of who they are wont fix anything. This is a whole problem, not a human problem. A whole problem of humans who are furries are causing problems inside of community and damaging it. It's as simple as that. You can't daisy chain the fandom by making it immune to bad things, like how every terrorist attack of late was done by one religion?

Lets treat it as a community issue then pushing the blame on a lone wolf like the left likes to do. "They aren't us, were good people" *Pulls fire alarms at MFF, overdoses 12 people, spreads HIV at AC, drills glory holes into hotel bathrooms* How about yall take some fucking responsibility and step away from such a vile dangerous cult of a crowd?


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 17, 2017)

Wow. I thought this horse had long since been beat to death and buried, but apparently it's still kicking.

Anyway, vocal minorities are a concern in any group, and not necessarily out of malice either. With the Furry Fandom in particular, due to its current reliance on social networking and subsequently its ready acceptance of aliases and avatars as well, it's only natural that GIFT will rear its ugly head that much more readily. However, with the demographic of the fandom being disproportionately comprised of teens and young adults compared to the general public, let alone other factors such as how two-thirds of the fandom are presumably LGBT+ or that a disproportionate number of furries have also been diagnosed with mental disorders like Aspergers, you really can't blame these individuals for trying to find their place in the world through communities where they can feel welcome and accepted, and one of the easiest ways to do that is through a sub-culture where escapism and creating a mask to express yourself is the norm.

Straight from the get-go, it's already a powder keg waiting to blow.

There isn't one definitive part of this that makes it all go to Hell on its own. Naivety, social awkwardness, and budding sexuality not only come together to create drama among members of the fandom, but when that drama spills out into the public domain it's not so easily forgotten by a media machine that loves televising the strange and unusual. The common response to this from the average furry tends to involve distancing themselves as far away as possible from the misguided and socially-inept fools causing it. However, this attempt at quarantine only contributes to concentrating the ineptitude, because without anyone in the fandom to tell these individuals to cease and desist, you're left with people who, simply for not knowing any better, are unaware that their actions are not only harming themselves but others as well.

And this is without even mentioning that such people are prone to manipulation by others, including potential sociopaths to whom it's not a case of knowing better but rather whether or not they actually care about the fandom as a whole.


----------



## Ciderfine (Dec 17, 2017)

Quite hard to name troublemakers when everyone in this community is a "friend". No one give out names, no want wants to be the "tattle tale". We have facts, proof but no names. Every incident of Con disaster, illegal activities was reported on but oddly enough no names where given?

This feels more like a cult, sealed lips, inside fursuit ships. It's a common practice of protecting troublemakers, happens a lot down south where "Family" means more than respecting the law. I see that a lot near appalachian area, a very dangerous vibe when no one speaks out about it yet we have proof. A very biased community. In fact I don't think that number is even accurate, I feel like we have a beehive of an issue where we cant get names because one: Everyone is either masked or is wearing fursuit paws so tough luck getting ID and 2: you become super hated if you do tell on someone. Furries are children.

I think your bitter because we proof, but we need to pressure people into finding out who did this and that. Having an alter ego to blame is not the issue, having the real person who is loved, protected and sheltered by a community that continuous allows the same things to happen endlessly. Your bad because I don't provide names, that isn't my job. I call out bullshit, now that's my job.

Rise above the same old bickering of "We need facts" "This is hella gay and fake" "Your such a hater" You reply is not even a solid one to try to debate. Its so angled I bet there's a rabbit crying right now in neverland reading it.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Dec 17, 2017)

Honestly, Cider? What you're proposing would not clean up the fandom; it'd tear it apart. Not because people who deserved it got outsted, but because regular old interpersonal drama would get dragged to the court of public opinion and amplified manifold. You do not have to make a public spectacle of someone to tell them their behavior is unwelcome. Publicly outing and shaming people serves no constructive purpose; it is a destructive act by nature. You tell them, to their face, that they done fucked up, and then you either cut ties with them or you don't. 

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: mainstream society doesn't much care one way or the other about furries on the whole. Furries worry more about what not-furries think than they actually think of us at all. But if the first thing Average Joe finds when he Googles "furry" is a pile of blog posts talking about the horrible misdeeds of this and that person just because they happen to be furry, pray tell how will that make him think _better_ of fandom?


----------



## Yakamaru (Dec 17, 2017)

More like, have some common sense when it comes to socializing in public, and being in public in general, IMO. There's exploring your sexuality, and then there's exploring that shit in public. While children may be watching.

"Mommy, why is that wolf moving his hips on that fox?". Try explaining that to 10-year old. 

I don't care what you do in the privacy of your own home. I much prefer keeping anything that a child shouldn't see away from public eye.



quoting_mungo said:


> Honestly, Cider? What you're proposing would not clean up the fandom; it'd tear it apart. Not because people who deserved it got outsted, but because regular old interpersonal drama would get dragged to the court of public opinion and amplified manifold. You do not have to make a public spectacle of someone to tell them their behavior is unwelcome. Publicly outing and shaming people serves no constructive purpose; it is a destructive act by nature. You tell them, to their face, that they done fucked up, and then you either cut ties with them or you don't.
> 
> I've said it before, and I'll say it again: mainstream society doesn't much care one way or the other about furries on the whole. Furries worry more about what not-furries think than they actually think of us at all. But if the first thing Average Joe finds when he Googles "furry" is a pile of blog posts talking about the horrible misdeeds of this and that person just because they happen to be furry, pray tell how will that make him think _better_ of fandom?


^
This fandom have an over-saturation of drama. We don't need this shit.

If this fandom doesn't stop with the identity politics and extreme in-group/out-group mentality and dynamics, this fandom will end up splitting.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 17, 2017)

Furries are fine. Most of them aren't doing anything illegal. It doesn't do us any good when you accuse us all of hoarding criminals. Maybe some people are, but there are criminals everywhere. I have confidence in people to do their civic duty in barring criminal activity from their events and households, just like with any other group. 

Society doesn't really give a fig about us one way or another. By default we are not mainstream. So... why do we care about their opinion so much?


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 17, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> Furries are fine. Most of them aren't doing anything illegal. It doesn't do us any good when you accuse us all of hoarding criminals. Maybe some people are, but there are criminals everywhere. I have confidence in people to do their civic duty in barring criminal activity from their events and households, just like with any other group.
> 
> Society doesn't really give a fig about us one way or another. By default we are not mainstream. So... why do we care about their opinion so much?


Considering that the Fandom is used as a haven or safe house by people who feel that their only option to express themselves without fear is from behind a mask, it sets a terrible precedent where, when such people end up doing something stupid in public, they're quick to retreat to the Fandom for protection, dragging with them the ire of those who don't tolerate what was done and are so swept up in the heat of the moment that they're not interested in differentiating between the group and the individual.

This indirectly impacts how the rest of us act in public, making us even more wary of what to do or say and in front of who than was already the case previously.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 17, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> Considering that the Fandom is used as a haven or safe house by people who feel that their only option to express themselves without fear is from behind a mask, it sets a terrible precedent where, when such people end up doing something stupid in public, they're quick to retreat to the Fandom for protection, dragging with them the ire of those who don't tolerate what was done and are so swept up in the heat of the moment that they're not interested in differentiating between the group and the individual.
> 
> This indirectly impacts how the rest of us act in public, making us even more wary of what to do or say and in front of who than was already the case previously.



I don't give a shit about what the public thinks. _Argumentum ad populum. _Just because the public wants us to do something, or thinks something, is immaterial. I've told several I'm a furry with no social repercussions, because I'm a respected member of the community and people trust me. I'm not going to go around telling people I pretend to be a wolf in personal sex RPs, but I'm also not going to tell people I want any type of porn, because I'm a businessman. 

Most furry cons are operated without any grief or headline making events, similar to any other con. I think you have an almost deliberately negative view of the fandom.


----------



## lupi900 (Dec 17, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> Most furry cons are operated without any grief or headline making events, similar to any other con. I think you have an almost deliberately negative view of the fandom.



More like he projecting his own insecurities on the whole fandom, instead of dealing with them. Lot's of old FAF members would hide there main site accounts full of gross porn. So the could go on massiuve rant's what degenerates the 18+ side is.


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 17, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> I don't give a shit about what the public thinks. _Argumentum ad populum. _Just because the public wants us to do something, or thinks something, is immaterial. I've told several I'm a furry with no social repercussions, because I'm a respected member of the community and people trust me. I'm not going to go around telling people I pretend to be a wolf in personal sex RPs, but I'm also not going to tell people I want any type of porn, because I'm a businessman.
> 
> Most furry cons are operated without any grief or headline making events, similar to any other con. I think you have an almost deliberately negative view of the fandom.


Quite the contrary, I have no problem with the fandom either. I do however take issue with people who do not take responsibility for their own actions, for they are usually the ones who fuck over everyone else.


lupi900 said:


> More like he projecting his own insecurities on the whole fandom, instead of dealing with them. Lot's of old FAF members would hide there main site accounts full of gross porn. So the could go on massiuve rant's what degenerates the 18+ side is.


This isn't about going on some morally hypocritical fetish rant; this is about people making fools of themselves in public and pawning off the blame to a group they happen to be associated with. We're only fortunate that the fandom is such a niche thing in society that it can be glazed over as little more than noise in the grand scheme of things, but it's still incumbent on us as individuals to determine what is making that noise, why it's making that noise, and whether or not we want that noise to define us.

I for one do not want to be defined by the actions of someone else just because we share a common interest. I've seen enough of it in the transhumanist community, the transformation community, and several other communities and fan groups that I'm associated with that the only conclusion I've been able to come up with is that it's worth my time to make my own noise.


----------



## Baalf (Dec 17, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> Considering that the Fandom is used as a haven or safe house by people who feel that their only option to express themselves without fear is from behind a mask, it sets a terrible precedent where, when such people end up doing something stupid in public, they're quick to retreat to the Fandom for protection, dragging with them the ire of those who don't tolerate what was done and are so swept up in the heat of the moment that they're not interested in differentiating between the group and the individual.
> 
> This indirectly impacts how the rest of us act in public, making us even more wary of what to do or say and in front of who than was already the case previously.



Are "hugboxes" really bad, though? If those people don't have other fandom members to turn to, then what? An overpriced therapist when they probably have more important things to spend money on? I mean, you don't need to tell someone only what they want to hear, but I do believe you can help people by giving them advice, but also enchouragement and comfort. I, myself, have had trouble coping with life, and without help from my best friends, I'd probably feel just as miserable now. That's why I feel it's important to have people there to comfort you. Again, not coddle you and only tell you what you want to do, but help you feel better.


----------



## Tao (Dec 17, 2017)

BennyJackdaw said:


> Are "hugboxes" really bad, though? If those people don't have other fandom members to turn to, then what? An overpriced therapist when they probably have more important things to spend money on? I mean, you don't need to tell someone only what they want to hear, but I do believe you can help people by giving them advice, but also enchouragement and comfort. I, myself, have had trouble coping with life, and without help from my best friends, I'd probably feel just as miserable now. That's why I feel it's important to have people there to comfort you. Again, not coddle you and only tell you what you want to do, but help you feel better.



Hugbox is a term used by those who dislike that they can't be a dick to everyone without repercussions. There's nothing wrong with kindness and we need more of it in the world. Being an argumentative cynic doesn't make you cool or unique. It just makes people not like you.


----------



## TheFoxFreedom (Dec 17, 2017)

Long texts


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 17, 2017)

BennyJackdaw said:


> Are "hugboxes" really bad, though? If those people don't have other fandom members to turn to, then what? An overpriced therapist when they probably have more important things to spend money on? I mean, you don't need to tell someone only what they want to hear, but I do believe you can help people by giving them advice, but also encouragement and comfort. I, myself, have had trouble coping with life, and without help from my best friends, I'd probably feel just as miserable now. That's why I feel it's important to have people there to comfort you. Again, not coddle you and only tell you what you want to do, but help you feel better.


Seeking help from a support group is reasonably beneficial in general. However, for an individual to instead use that same support group as a shield, or worse a weapon, to protect themselves from others they had a hand in pissing off is irresponsibly selfish.


Tao said:


> Hugbox is a term used by those who dislike that they can't be a dick to everyone without repercussions.


That's a pretty dismissive sweeping generalization. What led you to that conclusion?


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 17, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> Quite the contrary, I have no problem with the fandom either. I do however take issue with people who do not take responsibility for their own actions, for they are usually the ones who fuck over everyone else.



Yes, but that problem is a problem with people who refuse to take responsibility for their own actions. These types of people land anywhere and everywhere and are in no way specific to the fandom. Therefore, what is your point?



ChapterAquila92 said:


> This isn't about going on some morally hypocritical fetish rant; this is about people making fools of themselves in public and pawning off the blame to a group they happen to be associated with. We're only fortunate that the fandom is such a niche thing in society that it can be glazed over as little more than noise in the grand scheme of things, but it's still incumbent on us as individuals to determine what is making that noise, why it's making that noise, and whether or not we want that noise to define us.



Those people reveal their own ethics, and it's the fallacy of small sample size to judge an entire group by a small set of individuals. Pointing this out to people is the best way to show that, no, the majority of the fandom is not deviant, and please define deviant and whether or not it's harmful to society.



ChapterAquila92 said:


> I for one do not want to be defined by the actions of someone else just because we share a common interest. I've seen enough of it in the transhumanist community, the transformation community, and several other communities and fan groups that I'm associated with that the only conclusion I've been able to come up with is that it's worth my time to make my own noise.



Yes, it's important to point out to people that we are people, not subsets of everyone else.


----------



## Ciderfine (Dec 17, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> Honestly, Cider? What you're proposing would not clean up the fandom; it'd tear it apart. Not because people who deserved it got outsted, but because regular old interpersonal drama would get dragged to the court of public opinion and amplified manifold. You do not have to make a public spectacle of someone to tell them their behavior is unwelcome. Publicly outing and shaming people serves no constructive purpose; it is a destructive act by nature. You tell them, to their face, that they done fucked up, and then you either cut ties with them or you don't.
> 
> I've said it before, and I'll say it again: mainstream society doesn't much care one way or the other about furries on the whole. Furries worry more about what not-furries think than they actually think of us at all. But if the first thing Average Joe finds when he Googles "furry" is a pile of blog posts talking about the horrible misdeeds of this and that person just because they happen to be furry, pray tell how will that make him think _better_ of fandom?



How else does punishment and removing the bad parts of limb work? You see other logical places and people doing this. Sadly your view on identity politics and "protect the feelings" rejects calling for action. Whats worse a society that works differently in pieces or a giant pile of shite? The difference is change must occur, or the norm around everything will become dangerously stagnant.


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 17, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> Yes, but that problem is a problem with people who refuse to take responsibility for their own actions. *These types of people land* *anywhere and everywhere* and are in no way specific to the fandom. Therefore, what is your point?


The very exact point that you so eloquently answered your own question with. Whether or not it is a separate issue altogether, it is nonetheless still worthwhile to acknowledge as part of this discussion.


> Those people reveal their own ethics, and it's the fallacy of small sample size to judge an entire group by a small set of individuals. Pointing this out to people is the best way to show that, no, the majority of the fandom is not deviant, and please define deviant and whether or not it's harmful to society.


Fallacy or not, the reality you may have also picked up on while communicating the Fandom (or some other passion of yours) to people who aren't particularly interested in the subject matter to begin with is that they generally don't care enough to learn more about it beyond the first impression they're given, especially if they don't consider the subject matter to be of any importance to them.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 18, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> Fallacy or not, the reality you may have also picked up on while communicating the Fandom (or some other passion of yours) to people who aren't particularly interested in the subject matter to begin with is that they generally don't care enough to learn more about it beyond the first impression they're given, especially if they don't consider the subject matter to be of any importance to them.



Yes, that is generally how people operate. It is unfortunate and I intend to be a good example of a furry, which is generally automatic, since I conduct myself in an upright and responsible manner in society. 

Moreover, the main point that I'm still trying to make, which has been lost at this point, is that furries are not especially notable for any particularly abnormal degree of "degeneracy" or illegal activities. Mostly I see a consequence of a very sexually enlightened social group that is also somewhat, well quite frankly, not afraid to embrace their inner child.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Dec 18, 2017)

Ciderfine said:


> How else does punishment and removing the bad parts of limb work? You see other logical places and people doing this.


Punishment by public humiliation is antiquated; we as a society don't do that shit anymore. We tell people "Hey, you done a bad," we issue consequences, and once they've faced the consequences of their actions, it's played out. And you can't shame a gangrenous limb healthy. You cut it off, you remove it from your life, and then you move on.



Ciderfine said:


> Sadly your view on identity politics and "protect the feelings" rejects calling for action.


Not really. If you want to make a call for action that is "stop putting up with other furries doing stupid shit", go ahead. What I reject is acting like a bunch of bullies by making calls to shun such-and-such because someone says they done a bad. That's just witch hunting, and it is not about protecting anyone's feelings. It's about not letting the fandom devolve into toxic high school drama. That it spares the feelings of the unjustly/innocently accused is just a nice bonus.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 18, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> Punishment by public humiliation is antiquated; we as a society don't do that shit anymore.



I don't know, I feel like we have a lot of public shaming to do. Here in the US, we should really be constantly publicly shaming, say, executives who raise the price of cancer drugs 800% overnight, or the EpiPen 300%, or people who are willing to vote for people with histories of sexual abuse of minors, or are willing to use their religion to oppress certain segments of the population, and so on. These people might not be so bold if their reputation got trashed every time they poked their heads of their rabbit hole.


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 18, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> I don't know, I feel like we have a lot of public shaming to do. Here in the US, we should really be constantly publicly shaming, say, executives who raise the price of cancer drugs 800% overnight, or the EpiPen 300%, or *people who are willing to vote for people with histories of sexual abuse of minors*, or are willing to use their religion to oppress certain segments of the population, and so on. These people might not be so bold if their reputation got trashed every time they poked their heads of their rabbit hole.


I can understand and agree with the argument for auditing the shit out of unsavory business, religious and government leaders and practices, but to also go after the common citizen for... what, the crime of being ignorant and/or uncaring? May as well save your breath and not even bother, because the criteria you're proposing here is far too broad to be enforced in any meaningful manner that befits a liberal society.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 18, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> I can understand and agree with the argument for auditing the shit out of unsavory business, religious and government leaders and practices, but to also go after the common citizen for... what, the crime of being ignorant and/or uncaring? May as well save your breath and not even bother, because the criteria you're proposing here is far too broad to be enforced in any meaningful manner that befits a liberal society.



On the contrary, I can and will expect the common man to be educated to a certain point. After all, in a democratic society, the apathy of the commoner is everyone's undoing, because then the power is transferred to special interest groups. Then the powerful ones, usually the rich, step in. So, what's wrong in our society where we have hordes of people who think the earth is flat, 25% still think the sun revolves around the earth, and where superstition is still at about 98%?


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 18, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> On the contrary, I can and will expect the common man to be educated to a certain point. After all, in a democratic society, the apathy of the commoner is everyone's undoing, because then the power is transferred to special interest groups. Then the powerful ones, usually the rich, step in. So, what's wrong in our society where we have hordes of people who think the earth is flat, 25% still think the sun revolves around the earth, and where superstition is still at about 98%?


Still, you think that that alone justifies the superfluous act of ostracizing a rather large percentage of the population, such that not only the act itself loses all meaning and credibility but also reinforces the very behaviour you want to abolish? Again, to what end will such an act accomplish other than make you a public enemy?

No, if we're going to be playing this game of social engineering, start by indoctrinating the children instead.

EDIT: Oh, and the "hilarious" bit about the "apathetic commoner" is that the people who go vote and protest are people who can _afford_ to take time off from work to do so, not the folks struggling to make ends meet every month. Of course such commoners are going to be apathetic; they simply do not have the capacity to devote much time nor energy for anything beyond satisfying their immediate needs, even if they wanted to.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Dec 18, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> I don't know, I feel like we have a lot of public shaming to do. Here in the US, we should really be constantly publicly shaming, say, executives who raise the price of cancer drugs 800% overnight, or the EpiPen 300%, or people who are willing to vote for people with histories of sexual abuse of minors, or are willing to use their religion to oppress certain segments of the population, and so on.


Public outcry against corporations is a different beast altogether. Calling organizations on problems, after pointing said problems out to them (and not seeing change), is reasonable. Same thing with outcry against... what's the word? Tendencies, concepts, trends, patterns. 

But individuals? Nah. If ANY good comes of it, it's easily outweighed by the harm. If you want to cut people out of your life because of voting habits, you do you, but if you were to start campaigns of "Hey, this furry voted for a child molester, for shame!" you'd be in the wrong. Though none of your examples are, tbh, particularly relevant to the topic. Voting habits and religion are patently _not_ related to people's furry identities (with the possible exception of otherkin where religion/spirituality can at least be furry-adjacent), and even less than we need to police each other's kinks or creative practices, do we need to police other furries' activities and ideologies outside of fandom.


----------



## Moar Krabs (Dec 18, 2017)




----------



## Ciderfine (Dec 18, 2017)

Have you lost the plot? Society is about shaming evil doers. Get your name and photo posted online and on the news when you commits a crime. You ID entered into a data base of criminals. Segregated and all. Isn't that different if we do it for legal reasons. We do it ALL the time, from the law, to the people, to families it works and people who do bad things must be known.

If the good people want to stop and exile the furries that do bad shit, yes they will have to act like a "bully" but their adults. I don't think can really bully people who are adults. This is about outing adults who do stupid shit, this isn't  a gender based manhunt. Its a logical purge. Do not confuse the world bully with harassment and other terms to describe someone who has committed illegal nature.


----------



## Deleted member 82554 (Dec 18, 2017)

Most people in the fandom aren't as bad as what some make them out to be. It's just that the fandom is mostly an online culture and because of that people are able to express themselves more freely as opposed to what they normally would do in real life.

It's best not to overthink it...


----------



## quoting_mungo (Dec 18, 2017)

Ciderfine said:


> Have you lost the plot? Society is about shaming evil doers. Get your name and photo posted online and on the news when you commits a crime. You ID entered into a data base of criminals. Segregated and all.


And such databases should only be accessible by people with legitimate business with the information, meaning pretty much exclusively law enforcement. The way particularly US media will publish names and photos at the mere suspicion of a crime is a perversion of justice, and frequently endangers the individuals in question, even if they're later cleared. There is nothing civilized about that. Trial by media/public opinion does vastly more harm than good, and exemplifies the bad sides of sensationalist media. If you want someone's mistakes to follow them forever, you might as well make _every_ crime a capital crime, because doing your pennance just to be treated like a pariah is essentially a (socially and financially) costly, drawn-out death sentence.



Ciderfine said:


> If the good people want to stop and exile the furries that do bad shit, yes they will have to act like a "bully" but their adults. I don't think can really bully people who are adults.


Of course you can. That's a completely ridiculous assertation. Harassment and bullying exists in workplaces as well as in places kids hang out, online and offline, and it's never defensible. You can't, by definition, really force anyone out of a fandom, anyway; the most you can do is choose to not associate with them, yourself, and maybe remove them from places you personally run if they're being disruptive. They'll most likely still enjoy the content (in this case furry art), and still be a fan. 

There also is no such thing as people who can be neatly split into "good people" and "bad people". Everyone does stupid shit from time to time; it's part of being human.



Ciderfine said:


> Do not confuse the world bully with harassment and other terms to describe someone who has committed illegal nature.


Last I checked, bullying wasn't exactly _legal_. It also frequently involves other illegal acts, such as petty assault, discrimination, slander, and libel. It creates a toxic, hostile environment where nobody really thrives.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 18, 2017)

Moar Krabs said:


> View attachment 25373



I fap to 4 legged animals. 



quoting_mungo said:


> Public outcry against corporations is a different beast altogether. Calling organizations on problems, after pointing said problems out to them (and not seeing change), is reasonable. Same thing with outcry against... what's the word? Tendencies, concepts, trends, patterns.
> 
> But individuals? Nah. If ANY good comes of it, it's easily outweighed by the harm. If you want to cut people out of your life because of voting habits, you do you, but if you were to start campaigns of "Hey, this furry voted for a child molester, for shame!" you'd be in the wrong. Though none of your examples are, tbh, particularly relevant to the topic. Voting habits and religion are patently _not_ related to people's furry identities (with the possible exception of otherkin where religion/spirituality can at least be furry-adjacent), and even less than we need to police each other's kinks or creative practices, do we need to police other furries' activities and ideologies outside of fandom.



Yeah, except it doesn't matter to me if they're a furry or not. It does matter to me if they vote for a sexual predator, though, and I will call people out who do that.


----------



## KILL.MAIM.KILL (Dec 18, 2017)

*ITT: In-depth political debates, and people admitting to bestiality.*


----------



## dogryme6 (Dec 18, 2017)

two up^ Congratulations sir! You have officially gone off topic! ^two up
Also, I feel like that's a bit of illogical thinking. Sure, maybe the news and everyone else has talked about the things the current president did, but could you say that about someone lesser known, who choses to be a candidate? Who probably hasn't been in the news for it? Whose actions even if suspect of the population is a rumor at best? You can't call out people who voted for him as soon as you find out, or it's verified that they WERE a sexual predator, because people either weren't sure, weren't aware, or didn't care at the time because there was an equal chance of it not being true.
Try working your way around THAT.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Dec 18, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> Yeah, except it doesn't matter to me if they're a furry or not. It does matter to me if they vote for a sexual predator, though, and I will call people out who do that.


Call them on it, I can see. Painting a target on them, by e.g. posting lists of people who did? That's just cruel, and won't accomplish anything useful. Possibly the best you can hope to accomplish is shame them out of voting altogether next time. 

In the context of fandom, you'll also rarely have more than allegations to go by. And, well, "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't tend to fly in the court of public opinion. So you'd basically have to be willing to tear someone down over a rumor. Once torn down, they'll in most cases have a much harder time regaining trust than the people who started and spread the rumor in the first place; just look at what false rape/pedophilia allegations have done to people for examples of that.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 18, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> Still, you think that that alone justifies the superfluous act of ostracizing a rather large percentage of the population, such that not only the act itself loses all meaning and credibility but also reinforces the very behaviour you want to abolish? Again, to what end will such an act accomplish other than make you a public enemy?
> 
> No, if we're going to be playing this game of social engineering, start by indoctrinating the children instead.
> 
> EDIT: Oh, and the "hilarious" bit about the "apathetic commoner" is that the people who go vote and protest are people who can _afford_ to take time off from work to do so, not the folks struggling to make ends meet every month. Of course such commoners are going to be apathetic; they simply do not have the capacity to devote much time nor energy for anything beyond satisfying their immediate needs, even if they wanted to.



No mention of ostracism was made. In fact, quite the opposite assertion was made - if these people ostrasize themselves, by becoming apathetic about public affairs, special interest groups and people who do vote take over. This is why civic responsibility to so important. 

As for not takin enough time to become educated on issues... there's still no excuse. Not in this age of information. I used to live in a shack. The roof caved in the days after I moved out. I live in a camper now. I work constantly, well not at the moment because I'm in college. If I can find the time to look up politicians and figure out who to vote for, anyone can. Just as ignorance isn't a good defense for a trial, apathy isn't a good excuse for voting, or failing to vote. 

It's actually quite anti-intellectual to excuse this behavior. 

However, I do warrant that it is harder to be concerned about issues and such when one is struggling to make ends meet. When someone cannot feed themselves, ethics tend to fly out the window. As John Stuart Mill might say, people are moral and upright as long as they're fed. 

Also, I don't care to indoctrinate children. Maybe you have some sort of perverse obsession with programming children, but usually that's something religious people do. I'd rather teach kids to think for themselves, but that's just me. Good luck trying to make robots that think just like you.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 18, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> Call them on it, I can see. Painting a target on them, by e.g. posting lists of people who did? That's just cruel, and won't accomplish anything useful. Possibly the best you can hope to accomplish is shame them out of voting altogether next time.
> 
> In the context of fandom, you'll also rarely have more than allegations to go by. And, well, "innocent until proven guilty" doesn't tend to fly in the court of public opinion. So you'd basically have to be willing to tear someone down over a rumor. Once torn down, they'll in most cases have a much harder time regaining trust than the people who started and spread the rumor in the first place; just look at what false rape/pedophilia allegations have done to people for examples of that.



Yeah, posting lists of people would just be bullying, which is not an effective psychological weapon. It's also unethical, of course. Both reasons are good reasons not to bully people into doing what you want them to do.

However, encouraging people to reflect on their decisions, and if they can feel some shame for what they did, they can then decide if they want to improve themselves in the future and not vote for sexual predators in the future. 

And yes, I can see false allegations tearing people down. If the accused to strongly denying those accusations, I do tend to withhold judgement, unless they have a long history of allegations like Roy Moore did have.


----------



## lupi900 (Dec 19, 2017)

Tao said:


> Hugbox is a term used by those who dislike that they can't be a dick to everyone without repercussions. There's nothing wrong with kindness and we need more of it in the world. Being an argumentative cynic doesn't make you cool or unique. It just makes people not like you.



It's cute when other furs go how its okay mock furs they deem frigile snowflakes. But when there boring edgy teen level cynicism is called out suddenly were being unreasonable douches. Half of the ones here arguing how this fandom either needes saving or full of frigile snowflakes, Just wan't it to be there own version of a hugbox were being edgy prick's is king.

They sound no diffrent to that guy who came here to cry how another furry site was trash. But in reailty got banned for insulting a user's brother disability and how they need to grow a pair. There too far up there own arse to get there pretty much just bully's themselves.


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 19, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> No mention of ostracism was made. In fact, quite the opposite assertion was made - if these people ostrasize themselves, by becoming apathetic about public affairs, special interest groups and people who do vote take over. This is why civic responsibility to so important.


As quoting-mungo pointed out, the best you'll accomplish by shaming such people regardless would be disillusionment with a system that is now hostile to them. People tend to be unwilling to participate in such an environment; those that do are usually either stupid, brave, desperate, or have an agenda to push.


> As for not taking enough time to become educated on issues... there's still no excuse. Not in this age of information. I used to live in a shack. The roof caved in the days after I moved out. I live in a camper now. I work constantly, well not at the moment because I'm in college. If I can find the time to look up politicians and figure out who to vote for, anyone can. Just as ignorance isn't a good defense for a trial, apathy isn't a good excuse for voting, or failing to vote.


That's easy to say from our positions of privilege, where we've both had the privilege of a decent education that has at least indoctrinated us in the ways of critical thinking. If only many of these poor individuals were so fortunate.


> It's actually quite anti-intellectual to excuse this behavior.


It's also counterproductive to penalize people for their own deficiencies.


> However, I do warrant that it is harder to be concerned about issues and such when one is struggling to make ends meet. When someone cannot feed themselves, ethics tend to fly out the window. As John Stuart Mill might say, people are moral and upright as long as they're fed.


It's but one example of Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs in practice. Pie-in-the-sky ideas serve no meaningful purpose for the man struggling to maintain his own existence.


> Also, I don't care to indoctrinate children. Maybe you have some sort of perverse obsession with programming children, but usually that's something religious people do. I'd rather teach kids to think for themselves, but that's just me. Good luck trying to make robots that think just like you.


Education is a form of indoctrination. Let's also not forget that the formative years of your life involved being instructed by your seniors what is right, what is wrong, what to think, and how to think.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 19, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> As quoting-mungo pointed out, the best you'll accomplish by shaming such people regardless would be disillusionment with a system that is now hostile to them. People tend to be unwilling to participate in such an environment; those that do are usually either stupid, brave, desperate, or have an agenda to push.



Yes, a system should probably be hostile to people who want to deport people because of their country of origin, want to ostracize people based on their skin color, believe humans aren't causing climate change, etc. The other option is to simply ignore them and participate in liberal "tolerance," allowing them to exist in harmony with us... until they gain the legislative upper hand and start penalizing you, instead.



ChapterAquila92 said:


> That's easy to say from our positions of privilege, where we've both had the privilege of a decent education that has at least indoctrinated us in the ways of critical thinking. If only many of these poor individuals were so fortunate.



That's why good education is so important to the health of a nation.



ChapterAquila92 said:


> It's also counterproductive to penalize people for their own deficiencies.



It's good to make people aware of their deficiencies. I often point out the incredibly stupid things some people say, as a free community service for others.



ChapterAquila92 said:


> It's but one example of Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs in practice. Pie-in-the-sky ideas serve no meaningful purpose for the man struggling to maintain his own existence.



You seem to consider everything except technology as pie in the sky ideas.



ChapterAquila92 said:


> Education is a form of indoctrination. Let's also not forget that the formative years of your life involved being instructed by your seniors what is right, what is wrong, what to think, and how to think.



Excellent, now let's go indoctrinate everyone with the ability to think for themselves, form cogent arguments, think logically, and participate in democracy ethically.


----------



## KILL.MAIM.KILL (Dec 19, 2017)

Probably because you can't go five minutes in any furry community without seeing a graphic drawing of a fox pissing in a diaper.


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 19, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> Yes, a system should probably be hostile to people who want to deport people because of their country of origin, want to ostracize people based on their skin color, believe humans aren't causing climate change, etc.


Potential threats are a legitimate concern, but pre-emptively striking out on the grounds that they may come to fruition only guarantees a self-fulfilling prophecy; those on the receiving end will be justified in both playing the victim of your oppression and becoming the threat you fear.

The better solution is to provide an incentive to engage in behaviour that you deem appropriate, such that you indirectly undermine the advantages of whatever it is you're attempting to discourage. In other words: make the other guy's offer unappealing by making a better offer.


> The other option is to simply ignore them and participate in liberal "tolerance," allowing them to exist in harmony with us... until they gain the legislative upper hand and start penalizing you, instead.


I've heard this before.


			
				Hermann Goring said:
			
		

> ...voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is *tell them they are being attacked* and *denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger*. It works the same way in any country.





> That's why good education is so important to the health of a nation.


I couldn't agree more.


			
				Colonel Corazon Santiago said:
			
		

> Proper care and education for our children remains a cornerstone of our entire colonization effort. Children not only shape our future; they determine in many ways our present. Men and women work harder knowing their children are safe and close at hand, and never forget that, with children present, parents will defend their home to the death!





> You seem to consider everything except technology as pie in the sky ideas.


I'd be lying if I said that there weren't examples of hyped-up wondertechs that turned out to be vaporware peddled by snake oil salesmen, but that's why it's important to conduct trials with working proofs of concept.

Unlike social constructs however, technology is not dependent on the power of belief in order to function.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 19, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> Potential threats are a legitimate concern, but pre-emptively striking out on the grounds that they may come to fruition only guarantees a self-fulfilling prophecy; those on the receiving end will be justified in both playing the victim of your oppression and becoming the threat you fear.
> 
> The better solution is to provide an incentive to engage in behaviour that you deem appropriate, such that you indirectly undermine the advantages of whatever it is you're attempting to discourage. In other words: make the other guy's offer unappealing by making a better offer.
> 
> ...



On the contrary. Technology often comes about as the result of belief - inventors and visionaries believing that they can accomplish amazing things and benefit society.


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 19, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> On the contrary. Technology often comes about as the result of belief - inventors and visionaries believing that they can accomplish amazing things and benefit society.


Perhaps that may have been their motivation, but in the end the onus was on them to prove that the technology works. Unless we're talking about orks from Warhammer 40k, nothing technological we've ever produced has functioned on the basis of wishful thinking.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 19, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> Perhaps that may have been their motivation, but in the end the onus was on them to prove that the technology works. Unless we're talking about orks from Warhammer 40k, nothing technological we've ever produced has functioned on the basis of wishful thinking.



But that doesn't mean society doesn't function on the basis of wishful thinking. Just as wishful thinking (or very strong motivation) eventually fomented into amazing tech advances like smartphones, Facebook, and MRI machines, wishful thinking also translates into effectively run society.


----------



## Simo (Dec 19, 2017)

What's odd, is that a furry for 10 years, and a board game junkie, I have no idea what Warhammer 40k is, really...a sort of D&D?

I play games where we make railroads, plant grapes, build cars, and run crooked NYC politics...but have always wondered about why I never got onto the war part?

Guess, just different tastes.

But the furry fandom is hardly considered by those outside of it: we have wars, poverty, heath care, violence, pollution, gross inequality: furries don't seem to figure much in the minds of most folks, far as I have seen in my many years, out and about.


----------



## FluffyShutterbug (Dec 19, 2017)

I have no idea. It probably just boils down to the "It's different, and therefore it must be mocked!" pack-conformist mentality most people depressingly have.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 19, 2017)

KILL.MAIM.KILL said:


> Probably because you can't go five minutes in any furry community without seeing a graphic drawing of a fox pissing in a diaper.



*did not just do a search for that just to see what the hell it looks like*


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 19, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> But that doesn't mean society doesn't function on the basis of wishful thinking. Just as wishful thinking (or very strong motivation) eventually fomented into amazing tech advances like smartphones, Facebook, and MRI machines, wishful thinking also translates into effectively run society.


Which brings us back to Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs. It's certainly nice to have all of these wonderful toys, but they're not particularly advantageous to have if you're unable to feed yourself. An army marches on its stomach after all.


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 19, 2017)

Simo said:


> What's odd, is that a furry for 10 years, and a board game junkie, I have no idea what Warhammer 40k is, really...a sort of D&D?
> 
> I play games where we make railroads, plant grapes, build cars, and run crooked NYC politics...but have always wondered about why I never got onto the war part?
> 
> Guess, just different tastes.


Yeah, Warhammer 40k and its fantasy counterpart are tabletop war games published by Games Workshop. You can also find RPGs and videogames set in their respective settings as well.

Fantasy was actually what led me to discover the Fandom via Lizardmen (one of three "beast" races you can choose to play as - the other two are the goat-like Chaos Beastmen and the rat-like Skaven).


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 19, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> Which brings us back to Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs. It's certainly nice to have all of these wonderful toys, but they're not particularly advantageous to have if you're unable to feed yourself. An army marches on its stomach after all.



The system must be looked at as a whole. Otherwise you're reducing your ethical parameters to the annoying simplicity that special interest groups employ.


----------



## Simo (Dec 20, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> The system must be looked at as a whole. Otherwise you're reducing your ethical parameters to the annoying simplicity that special interest groups employ.



You need to read Herbert Marcuse. One Dimensional Man, 1963?

Maybe, I find some quotes:

in summation, that I post, from time to time...but he's not as easy read....in brief:

here:

"The means of communication, the irresistible output of the entertainment and information industry carry with them prescribed attitudes and habits, certain intellectual and emotional reactions which bind the consumers to the producers and, through the latter to the whole social system. The products indoctrinate and manipulate; they promote a false consciousness which is immune against its falsehood...Thus emerges a pattern of one-dimensional thought and behavior."

“Technology serves to institute new, more effective, and more pleasant forms of social control and social cohesion. The totalitarian tendency of these controls seems to assert itself in still another sense—by spreading to the less developed and even to the pre-industrial areas of the world, and by creating similarities in the development of capitalism and communism.”

"The people recognize themselves in their commodities; they find their soul in their automobile, hi-fi set, split-level home, kitchen equipment."

"If mass communications blend together harmoniously, and often unnoticeably, art, politics, religion, and philosophy with commercials, they bring these realms of culture to their common denominator -- the commodity form. The music of the soul is also the music of salesmanship. Exchange value, not truth value, counts."

"Freedom of enterprise was from the beginning not altogether a blessing. As the liberty to work or to starve, it spelled toil, insecurity, and fear for the vast majority of the population. If the individual were no longer compelled to prove himself on the market, as a free economic subject, the disappearance of this freedom would be one of the greatest achievements of civilization."

“If the worker and his boss enjoy the same television program and visit the same resort places, if the typist is as attractively made up as the daughter of her employer, if the Negro owns a Cadillac, if they all read the same newspaper, then this assimilation indicates not the disappearance of classes, but the extent to which the needs and satisfactions that serve the preservation of the Establishment are shared by the underlying population.”

-Herbert Marcuse, excerpts, One Dimensional Man, 1964

and so, I go my own way, not caring what the establishment thinks: I know I have my own ethics, this is enough.

I get so sick of furries, hating themselves.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 20, 2017)

Simo said:


> You need to read Herbert Marcuse. One Dimensional Man, 1963?
> 
> Maybe, I find some quotes:
> 
> ...



I've certainly seen a lot of snips from that books that other intellectuals on my forums and Facebook pages post. I should check it out.


----------



## lupi900 (Dec 20, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> *did not just do a search for that just to see what the hell it looks like*



Pretty much my thought's when most furry sites are clear on being 18+ & have SFW modes or tagging.


----------



## dragon-in-sight (Dec 20, 2017)

It's becuase of people needing to disparage others to define their own identity. There always has to be someone or something to look down upon, so people can feel superior. Another aspect is a generally prude attitude people have towards sexuality. Even in our modern times where sex is to be seen everywhere people have a verry wired sense of morality towards certain kinds of sexcual variety. A few hundred years of religious brainwashing can't be cured that fast I guess.


----------



## Lunar Man (Dec 22, 2017)

dragon-in-sight said:


> Another aspect is a generally prude attitude people have towards sexuality. Even in our modern times where sex is to be seen everywhere people have a verry wired sense of morality towards certain kinds of sexcual variety. A few hundred years of religious brainwashing can't be cured that fast I guess.



It is in human nature to put others down, to look at certain things in disgust. Part of forming one's own identity is having personal standards. It has very litttle to do with "religious brainwashing".

Why, you're looking at people in disgust for looking at people in disgust! You see? No one can escape it. Just about everyone (except the buddhists maybe) hates someone. It's part of forming a personal identity. Part of being _"you_". I see nothing wrong with that.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 22, 2017)

Lunar Man said:


> It is in human nature to put others down, to look at certain things in disgust. Part of forming one's own identity is having personal standards. It has very litttle to do with "religious brainwashing".
> 
> Why, you're looking at people in disgust for looking at people in disgust! You see? No one can escape it. Just about everyone (except the buddhists maybe) hates someone. It's part of forming a personal identity. Part of being _"you_". I see nothing wrong with that.



Personal standards, however, are often confused with _what everyone else should do._ Ethically speaking, people need to have two sets of beliefs - one for personal use, and one for public use. 

And I don't think hating someone, or a group of people, is healthy, or should be advocated or accepted as normal. We should always be working to purge the prejudice for our minds.


----------



## Lunar Man (Dec 22, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> Personal standards, however, are often confused with _what everyone else should do._ Ethically speaking, people need to have two sets of beliefs - one for personal use, and one for public use.



Agreed, agreed. But when others tell me that I'm somehow morally inferior for not accepting it, or not liking it, that I'm "brainwashed"... then it becomes an issue!



BahgDaddy said:


> And I don't think hating someone, or a group of people, is healthy, or should be advocated or accepted as normal. We should always be working to purge the prejudice for our minds.



It's one thing to dislike a certain group of people. It's another to be a hatemonger! Perhaps "hate" was too strong of a word.

I still believe that it is perfectly normal and heakthy to dislike certain groups of people though. That statement, still stands.


----------



## Deleted member 82554 (Dec 22, 2017)

The more I think about it the more I come to the realization that the fandom doesn't get the flack it does because it is different, but because individuals within it put to much importance on it and perpetuate this idea of it being something it is not. I miss the days when the fandom was nothing more than a hobby, not some sort of flamboyant quasi-sexual alt lifestyle where your very being is in jeopardy for keeping it to yourself.

Maybe this is just the ramblings of a pessimistic old fuck that has seen the vietnam equivalent of the fandom one to many times, and my opinion might upset some, but the aforementioned patterns is something I've noticed a lot of since my involvement.

In other words, people rarely care about something if you don't treat it like it's a big deal.


----------



## dragon-in-sight (Dec 22, 2017)

Lunar Man said:


> Part of forming one's own identity is having personal standards. It has very litttle to do with "religious brainwashing".



This may be true. But this psychological mechanism was often used by institutions to claim influence over the people. The faint-hearted always looked up to the allegedly strong to give them standarts, rules and direction. And the potentates secular and clerical alike were always skilled in using these expectations for their own advantage. Give them an idea to identify with, be it national pride, devine revelation or a code of morals. And then give then an enemy they can fear, hate or fight against. Niccolò Machiavelli already discribed this game of power in the early 16th century. Divide et impera is the name of the game, and it's still played until today just with different actors.


----------



## EmpressCiela (Dec 22, 2017)

I usually just chalk it up to Mainstream media not being to accepting of our ideas and standards of openness to all and inclusivity without discrimination (i realize that's a tad bit redundant, but just bear with be. I barely slept.), both of which aren't really priorities to the Mainstream media anymore, despite them trying to ham-fistedly beat their audiences over the head with perverted versions of those ideals. To them, we're still the butt of a running gag that should've ended years ago, but thanks to them trying to capitalize on the whole "furries are fucking wierd" attitude of the past, they're just driving people away from us. Though, on that same coin they're introducing a small group of open-minded individuals to us, so I suppose it isn't all bad.

Wait. What was the topic again?


----------



## aceskywalker (Dec 24, 2017)

Off the top of my head...

A. Fursuits - I'm a fan of them and I'm saving up money for one. But hiding your physical characteristics completely behind an animal look is weird, full stop.
B. Many furries are lacking in social skill finesse. I'm guilty of this, and I work with sick people FFS. 
C. General misconceptions that media has about groups, even "mainstream" interests like video games.
D. The weird fetishes that some furries have. Exaggerated by media, but exists regardless.

My $0.02: I don't really care if mainstream society gives its "blessing" upon this fandom. As a self-described gamer, car enthusiast, brony, weeaboo, furry, I've seen my interests been the punching bag of the internet and/or general society. I've had people question why I like [any interest above], and if I had a death wish when I got hurt during a karting accident. 

Furthermore, I kinda don't want the furry fandom to enter mainstream acceptance. That opens a Pandora's box of the organic nature of this fandom being coopted by some faceless corporation that sees dollar signs from we heavy spenders.


----------



## depthjacks (Dec 25, 2017)

P_Dragon said:


>


Rolf


----------



## lupi900 (Dec 25, 2017)

aceskywalker said:


> My $0.02: I don't really care if mainstream society gives its "blessing" upon this fandom. As a self-described gamer, car enthusiast, brony, weeaboo, furry, I've seen my interests been the punching bag of the internet and/or general society. I've had people question why I like [any interest above], and if I had a death wish when I got hurt during a karting accident.



There just morons who can't handle having there ignorance flung back at them. I've had one guy blindly go on how MLP fans are peados, with others online resorting to insults. Instead of answering my question how's it any diffrent to 18+ women or both men/women watching show's aimed at boy aged 6 to 10, like adventure time.

Why care about there sorry's if there too dense to get how serious it is falsely calling people child chasers.


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Dec 25, 2017)

This simple question has a simple answer. People gonna hate!


----------



## Baalf (Dec 25, 2017)

TheArchiver said:


> No. We absolutely are.
> I've listed several reasons why in a thread that was haphazardly hidden.
> The stigma is deserved.



No, we are not and it isn't.

A big problem is you people act like we do stuff because we're furries, or the horrible things furries have done are completely indigenous to the furry community. As I've said before, it's not. All walks of life from furries to people who despise every non-human on the planet has had a member of its community do horrible things. Even fetish art is not exclusive to furries.

I think the big problem, really, is this:
You don't WANT the fandom to be seen in a better life. You don't WANT the truth about furries to be shown. You WANT us to be hated, that's why you act like it's a huge crime if any furry were to defend themselves as furries. You think it's fine that people have unneeded prejudice. You help prejudice by shoving all the bad things in people's faces, which makes people hate furries more. Yet most furries UNDERSTAND that **** like Rainfurrest was uncalled for, yet you pretend furries themselves allow stuff like that.

The biggest problem is that we have people like many past FAF members spreading around the hate and negativity like a flu, labeling the entire community as degenerates, crying out anytime anyone tries to defend furries or comforts others when they feel down and such. You have this grand plan on how to "change the furry fandom for the better," when really it just feels like you guys are trying to abolish furries entirely, which has been my problem for years.


----------



## Yakamaru (Dec 25, 2017)

AkuroZinnui said:


> I usually just chalk it up to Mainstream media not being to accepting of our ideas and standards of openness to all and inclusivity without discrimination (i realize that's a tad bit redundant, but just bear with be. I barely slept.), both of which aren't really priorities to the Mainstream media anymore, despite them trying to ham-fistedly beat their audiences over the head with perverted versions of those ideals. To them, we're still the butt of a running gag that should've ended years ago, but thanks to them trying to capitalize on the whole "furries are fucking wierd" attitude of the past, they're just driving people away from us. Though, on that same coin they're introducing a small group of open-minded individuals to us, so I suppose it isn't all bad.
> 
> Wait. What was the topic again?


Some have the idea that a fandom is more than just another fandom. And the mainstream media picks up on that and end up exaggerating shit. Those values are only what some Furries feel/have. They do not apply to everyone, and as such can't be used as an umbrella value.

The mainstream media have a knack for finding the deviants and use them as a means to say "Hey, look! Furries!". Quite frankly, if people wanna try and appeal to the mainstream because of their cult-like behaviour, feel free. I however won't support, interact with nor associate with anyone who do.


----------



## Kiaara (Dec 25, 2017)

I believe Furries are frowned upon because people are like:
"Look! Young adults and adults in costumes all the time! Ew, they all have huge furry cons and talk about oversexualized animals!!!!"


----------



## Yakamaru (Dec 25, 2017)

BennyJackdaw said:


> No, we are not and it isn't.
> 
> A big problem is you people act like we do stuff because we're furries, or the horrible things furries have done are completely indigenous to the furry community. As I've said before, it's not. All walks of life from furries to people who despise every non-human on the planet has had a member of its community do horrible things. Even fetish art is not exclusive to furries.


Pretty sure I've asked you this before.

Why are we to get together as a "Furry """community""""? And if or when we do, what will we do? Are there any requirements? Ideals? Values? Do we have any sort of ruling body? What about differences in ideologies? What about differences in views? How do we deal with those who supposedly "don't want to get together"? What do we do with people living in different countries?


----------



## lupi900 (Dec 25, 2017)

BennyJackdaw said:


> The biggest problem is that we have people like many past FAF members spreading around the hate and negativity like a flu, labeling the entire community as degenerates, crying out anytime anyone tries to defend furries or comforts others when they feel down and such. You have this grand plan on how to "change the furry fandom for the better," when really it just feels like you guys are trying to abolish furries entirely, which has been my problem for years.



Self loathing furs are the new anti-furs, non-members liking us is going up on allot forums. Meanwhile all we get hate wise is just super inscure & really immature furs that only cling on outdatded stereotypes to cry about how were nothing but degenrates. The fact they dodge why they even here say allot about there piorities.

I've few users on ignore who are dumb enough to think people give a shit about there bitter thought's in threads like this. While outside in other threads are just attacking users like salty 12 year olds.

/r/Furry had a user there that would make threads going on how NSFW side are cancer & would spam anti-fur content from his own youtube account. That was closed after he was rage banned because nobody was buying his weak troll attempt's anymore.


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 25, 2017)

I'm still chiming in on this.

Feel free to do whatever you want in private - the only things you'll have to worry about not staying in the bedroom are pregnancies and STIs - the required discretion (dare I say anonymity) arguably being why a lot of us do end up using aliases for ourselves online. Similarly, there's nothing inherently wrong about putting on the mask and fursuit in public for much the same purpose... to a degree.

I'm in agreement with others here that the public and the media both don't care about what we do, but I do caution that they care about what they see us do. It should therefore follow as commonsense that you shouldn't make a complete arse of yourself in public at all, but if the media alone is anything to go by that hasn't stopped people from using masks to do exactly that at protests, conventions and sporting events, much to the chagrin of everyone around them.

The mask may be a confidence booster for the timid and the socially inept, but it should never be taken for granted. Confidence combined with social ineptitude especially, though not necessarily malicious in nature, contributes to making poor judgement calls that are just as much a cause for public drama as is deliberate assholery.

As for those of you complaining about fellow furries wanting to establish rules within the fandom and dismissing them as edgy pricks, let's not forget that, whilst you may believe that this ought to be nothing more than a fandom, there are furries who do believe it to be a community and treat it as such. So long as such furries exist, and so long as many are also socially inept and easily intimidated, the rest of us are essentially burdened with babying them so long as they are unable - and oftentimes _unwilling_ - to leave their new-found digital comfort zone and grow into capable individuals able to re-enter society.

For those of you who weren't around for a certain previous dumpster fire a couple years ago, ferret-sage had this and more to say on the matter:


ferret-sage said:


> I WANT TO BUY THE ILLUSION YOU ARE TRYING TO SELL ME. Unlike "trolls" (defined as: anyone who doesn't agree 100% with you on everything), I WANT TO BELIEVE. I've been here 23 YEARS trying to buy the vision you're trying to put before me.
> 
> My direct experience with furries over 23 years has taught me the EXACT OPPOSITE. I started off with a 100% positive attitude towards furries and kept that attitude for years. But, something began to go wrong when the furries began to live online. Now, it's just total damage control.
> 
> ...


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 25, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> I'm still chiming in on this.
> 
> Feel free to do whatever you want in private - the only things you'll have to worry about not staying in the bedroom are pregnancies and STIs - the required discretion (dare I say anonymity) arguably being why a lot of us do end up using aliases for ourselves online. Similarly, there's nothing inherently wrong about putting on the mask and fursuit in public for much the same purpose... to a degree.
> 
> ...



And what are your proposed solutions to the problem? Furries are socially inept. It sort of goes without saying. But you shouldn't want to punish furries for being furries.


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Dec 25, 2017)

Furries, from what I have seen, are a tame lot compared to some other groups and fandoms. Yeah, they have a lot of nsfw art and things. So what? So do other fandoms. I do think we celabrate it more, but really, so what? Kinks? Yep! So does everyone else. I don't personally see the problem. But then again, I am 42 years old, and see things a wee bit difurently than a 20 something or a teenager. But what I have seen is a bunch of guys and gals that are pretty nice to each other, get along for the most part(who doesn't have any drama?), and love furry art, characters, fursuiters, and anthro animals of all kinds! So...........what was the question again?


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 25, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> And what are your proposed solutions to the problem? Furries are socially inept. It sort of goes without saying. But you shouldn't want to punish furries for being furries.


Indeed, how dare I call for intervention and rehabilitation when I could just watch the lives of weak-willed addicts circle the drain of mediocrity _ad infinitum_.

In all seriousness,though, there is no quick fix to this, and not one person can possibly pull it off on their own. I can only offer suggestions at this point with rudimentary details. You're going to need a committee for anything more than that.

With that said, since these individuals are escaping to the comfort of the Fandom due to their inadequacies, and since the Fandom is as open to newcomers as it is, what is preventing us from taking an active role in the rehab process and turning the Fandom into an empowerment tool to that end? It's not like there aren't psychologists or psychiatrists in the fandom, after all.

And no, I'm not interested in hearing the complaints of fetish addicts and stuck-up affluents; both are just as much to blame for allowing the Fandom to end up in its current state.


----------



## Kiaara (Dec 25, 2017)

Oh, something I forgot to add.
Why is the furry fandom that strange? I mean, there are far worse fandoms out there. I mean for god's sakes, In the emo kids community, The Lung fic is a very well known thing. May I add a list of things that are weirder than furries?
-The Milk Fic
-The Lung Fic
-The Cactus Fic
-The Hat/Hamster Fic
-The Hamster Fic (Hamster's POV)
-The Chair Fic
There are probably more, these are just the ones I stumbled apon.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 25, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> Indeed, how dare I call for intervention and rehabilitation when I could just watch the lives of weak-willed addicts circle the drain of mediocrity _ad infinitum_.
> 
> Furthermore, since these individuals are escaping to the comfort of the Fandom due to their inadequacies, and since the Fandom is as open to newcomers as it is, what is preventing us from taking an active role in the rehab process and turning the Fandom into an empowerment tool to that end? It's not like there aren't psychologists or psychiatrists in the fandom, after all.
> 
> And no, I'm not interested in hearing the complaints of fetish addicts and stuck-up affluents; both are just as much to blame for allowing the Fandom to end up in its current state.



Right, so it sounds like you want to give "counseling" to people you deem degenerate, and kick out and ostracize people with fetishes you disagree with. No thanks, we have enough evangelicals out there.


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Dec 25, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> Right, so it sounds like you want to give "counseling" to people you deem degenerate, and kick out and ostracize people with fetishes you disagree with. No thanks, we have enough evangelicals out there.


Amen to THAT!!


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Dec 25, 2017)

There is an old saying: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Period.


----------



## Kiaara (Dec 25, 2017)

Okami_No_Heishi said:


> There is an old saying: If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Period.


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 25, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> Right, so it sounds like you want to give "counseling" to people you deem degenerate, and kick out and ostracize people with fetishes you disagree with. No thanks, we have enough evangelicals out there.


You couldn't be more wrong. I've said again and again that I really don't care what happens in the bedroom, save that I'd rather not hear about it, so I don't know why you're pulling this "ostracize people with fetishes I disagree with" claim out of your ass. Similarly, I'm not insinuating that anyone involved is a degenerate. If anything, I have more reason to suspect that you are projecting your own preconceived assumptions by making these strawman claims.

Heck, I'll even challenge you on your claim that furries, _including the both of us_, are inherently socially inept as well. Bravo. Does reality scare you so much that you feel compelled to retreat to the Internet to seek acceptance and closure from people you'll likely never meet in person? Are you so ashamed of your existence that you have to secretly compensate with power fantasies to cope with the guilt? No? Then why are you making the claim that you're socially inept when you're clearly not?


----------



## Kiaara (Dec 25, 2017)

Ooh, a debate :3


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 25, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> You couldn't be more wrong. I've said again and again that I really don't care what happens in the bedroom, save that I'd rather not hear about it, so I don't know why you're pulling this "ostracize people with fetishes I disagree with" claim out of your ass. Similarly, I'm not insinuating that anyone involved is a degenerate. If anything, I have more reason to suspect that you are projecting your own preconceived assumptions by making these strawman claims.



By many definitions, I am a degenerate. Simply by being a furry, some consider me a degenerate, by viewing furry viewing, even more so, by viewing the type of yiff I do, even more so. So I really don't care to play the "these people are degenerates, and these people aren't" game. Also, in order to make you make sense and not create fancy word salad, sometimes I poke odd holes into your argument to make you explain things better.



ChapterAquila92 said:


> Heck, I'll even challenge you on your claim that furries, _including the both of us_, are inherently socially inept as well. Bravo. Does reality scare you so much that you feel compelled to retreat to the Internet to seek acceptance and closure from people you'll likely never meet in person? Are you so ashamed of your existence that you have to secretly compensate with power fantasies to cope with the guilt? No? Then why are you making the claim that you're socially inept when you're clearly not?



Correct, I'm not socially inept, so, what is your point?


----------



## Junkerfox (Dec 25, 2017)

Ciderfine said:


> Actually the nature and siology of furries proves that they do protect troublemakers again and again. From drug abuse, destruction of property, pulling fire alarms, throwing soiled diapers onto cars, sexual assault that is never reported to the police but sent to the admins like cry baby letters proves that we are allowing it because these people are still with us and allowed to return to every big party and continue this cycle of PR malaria. By staying silent and not openling taking about it is allowing it, and not pushing for change and responsibility we are making an environment in which it its born again and again.
> 
> 
> We don't call out bullshit and ride with it like its our normal social stance or vibe. No one has the responsibility to see "I and many others do not agree with this and are not like this." It's so simple to call out bullshit but we allow more arsonists to enter our community and set fire to events, PR, news and cause such damage yet there's no attempt to apologize or say "This is not us".
> ...


Why am i not following you yet?
Lemme fix that.


----------



## ChapterAquila92 (Dec 25, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> By many definitions, I am a degenerate. Simply by being a furry, some consider me a degenerate, by viewing furry viewing, even more so, by viewing the type of yiff I do, even more so. So I really don't care to play the "these people are degenerates, and these people aren't" game. Also, in order to make you make sense and not create fancy word salad, sometimes I poke odd holes into your argument to make you explain things better.


Method to the madness, huh? I'd buy it, though you had no need to make it look absurd.


> Correct, I'm not socially inept, so, what is your point?


As much as it buys into the previous point, why the nebulous claim in the first place?

Still, I stand by my choice of vocabulary. When I make use of specific words or phrases, it's because I have good reason to use them, however clinically morbid it may appear.

For "socially inept" in particular, I'm referring to severe deficiencies in an individual's social development - deficiencies that make it difficult for the individual to function in society without support. I don't speak lightly on this; my own experience with peers afflicted with developmental disorders (Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, Down Syndrome, Fragile-X, Autism, etc.) has been that these people can be very capable at what they do (successful even) provided that someone, if not a community, is willing to take time and resources to support them in overcoming those challenges.


----------



## Simo (Dec 25, 2017)

KiaraTC said:


> Ooh, a debate :3



Yep, one that has raged since the dawn of FA itself, maybe earlier!

Maybe the folks who worry that furries have a 'bad name' should hire a PR firm. : P


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 25, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> Method to the madness, huh? I'd buy it, though you had no need to make it look absurd.
> As much as it buys into the previous point, why the nebulous claim in the first place?
> 
> Still, I stand by my choice of vocabulary. When I make use of specific words or phrases, it's because I have good reason to use them, however clinically morbid it may appear.
> ...



Great, then support them and help them. Just stop bitching about the fandom insulating them from whatever altruistic healing potion you seem to want them to consume.


----------



## Troj (Dec 25, 2017)

The times, they are a-changin'. Even in the past two or so years, I've seen a noticeable increase in neutral-to-positive media coverage about furries, and a promising shift in how even average people talk about the fandom. Even the joking about the fandom has turned a corner, I would argue. 

Some people are still skeptical of the fandom due to the usual stereotypes, the apocryphal myths and viral stories about our high-profile losers, and the innate human tendency to fear the unknown and mock the unusual.

One of the great and terrible things about the fandom is that it's extremely open and accepting.  Lots of us will agree that too many furries don't know how to navigate "broken stairs," bad behaviors, and weird conflicts because they're nervous and don't want to be seen as mean or exclusionary.

But, I think the rcent insanity around Trump, Antifa, SJWs, Nazis and the Furry Raiders has started to force the fandom at large to confront how to navigate the middle path when it comes to setting boundaries and enforcing rules.

As for the matter of widespread social awkwardness in the fandom, well, I'm certainly doing my small part to help furs with that piece as best I can. I think the fandom would benefit from folks gaining some clarity and consensus around basic Do's and Don't's, and generally agreeing that it "takes a village" and that we each need to "be the change." 

But, we also need to cut ourselves a bit of slack, too, because furries are hardly the cringiest fandom at this point (surprisingly), and geeks are _always_ gonna geek to some degree, so we need to be willing to embrace the more benign forms of that spergy geekiness.

Similarly, we should continue to insist that people confine their kinky and sexual behaviors to the appropriate times and right places with consenting partners--but, at the same time, we need to steer clear of the Puritanical head trip that would insist that the fandom is only legitimate if it can prove it's totally G-rated and asexual. When certain mundanes insist on seeing the entire fandom as just a pure sex fest despite ample available evidence to the contrary, they're the ones with the problem, not us.


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Dec 25, 2017)

KiaraTC said:


> View attachment 25734


Lol


----------



## quoting_mungo (Dec 26, 2017)

Troj said:


> But, I think the rcent insanity around Trump, Antifa, SJWs, Nazis and the Furry Raiders has started to force the fandom at large to confront how to navigate the middle path when it comes to setting boundaries and enforcing rules.


I disagree - what I've observed is far from any kind of "middle path" philosophy. Rather, what we're seeing is a rather extreme polarization. If you're not with us, you're against us. It's a disturbingly easy sell, owing largely to the fact that any decent person will agree that nazis are bad. If nazis are bad, then you need to be against nazis, and if you're not living up to our standards of what "against nazis" entails, then that must be because you're on their side. The unspoken threat of being labeled as on the nazis' side is enough to make a lot of people conform. And it's... understandable. Being labeled as a "nazi sympathizer" carries significant social stigma.

But it's also a bludgeon and a thought-terminating cliche, and calling on it to silence and/or shame people into conformity is not a good way to build a healthy community. Some years ago the thought-terminating cliche _du jour_ was "rape apologist". Now it's "nazi sympathizer". We - all of us - need to recognize that in many cases, these phrases are applied dubiously, for the purpose of justifying ignoring positions the speaker doesn't agree with. (As well as being quite hurtful to the people unfairly labeled such.)


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 26, 2017)

I think what we need to do is maintain ethical parameters and always call people out who are being unethical on an individual basis. If we're trying to ostracize entire sections of the fandom, which isn't really possible anyway because it's really an amorphous "thing" that people are a part of, with perfectly no central authority except maybe FA, we're thinking too broadly. 

And I'm not even sure who these degenerates are that people keep talking about. Not every con is like Rain Furrest. Few furries draw cub porn, or pedo porn. Etc. Those people are givin, however, a worrisome level of tolerance at e6.


----------



## Illuminaughty (Dec 26, 2017)

I think that people who are unfamiliar with the whole idea of a furry "fandom" tend to view people who identify as "furries" in one of two ways.

1.) They aren't furries at all and simply enjoy anthropomorphic animal characters in media and/or produce their own media involving said characters.

2.) They are the bizarre conglomeration of people known to most as "Furries", which are generally regarded to be socially inept and pursuers of strange fetish art/fetish activities.

Not saying it's right, just saying that's how people on the "outside" tend to view it. Of course we all know that any group can have any kind of person, and in some groups, the worst members can be the loudest. I think that's probably the case with the "furry fandom".
Now I don't identify as a furry- I don't have a "fursona", I don't draw a lot of anthropomorphic animals for their own sake and I don't actively seek out media and material involving anthropomorphic animals for their own sake. There is media I enjoy that involves them, however it won't catch my eye for the "furries" alone.

That being said, I fully understand that the loudest representatives of any fandom aren't necessarily the majority- they may even be a minority. However because they are the loudest, for those who aren't interested in the fandom itself, they are often the only contact they have with the fandom. Seeing how that is, it shouldn't be surprising that most "mainstream" media and opinion has a negative view of the "furry fandom"- even if it isn't a correct or accurate one.


----------



## Baalf (Dec 26, 2017)

ChapterAquila92 said:


> Indeed, how dare I call for intervention and rehabilitation when I could just watch the lives of weak-willed addicts circle the drain of mediocrity _ad infinitum_.
> 
> In all seriousness,though, there is no quick fix to this, and not one person can possibly pull it off on their own. I can only offer suggestions at this point with rudimentary details. You're going to need a committee for anything more than that.
> 
> ...



You're just coming off as an elitist acting like a martyr.



ChapterAquila92 said:


> Are you so ashamed of your existence that you have to secretly compensate with power fantasies to cope with the guilt?



Is that wrong, though? To play games, roleplay, heck even come up with imaginary characters that hang around with you everywhere you go to take your mind off the grim reality, which unfortunately is actually very bleak? I'll admit, I DO go to lengths to get by in life, because I'll admit again I hate the state of the world as it is, and though I try to do what I can to help the world, there's only so much one person can do. To take my mind off of reality, I often times imagine that my characters are around to talk to me. I know they're not real, but because they're not, they can stick with me. I don't see how that makes a person crazy or socially inept, it just means they have an active imagination.


----------



## dogryme6 (Dec 26, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> Right, so it sounds like you want to give "counseling" to people you deem degenerate, and kick out and ostracize people with fetishes you disagree with. No thanks, we have enough evangelicals out there.


Ohai what I wanted to do to, how's it going holding up the fort? Ah, doing fine? Being sharp, being fresh? Gooood...


Troj said:


> _snip_
> Similarly, we should continue to insist that people confine their kinky and sexual behaviors to the appropriate times and right places with consenting partners--but, at the same time, we need to steer clear of the Puritanical head trip that would insist that the fandom is only legitimate if it can prove it's totally G-rated and asexual. When certain mundanes insist on seeing the entire fandom as just a pure sex fest despite ample available evidence to the contrary, they're the ones with the problem, not us.


I guess that's a good middle ground I could agree on.


quoting_mungo said:


> I disagree - what I've observed is far from any kind of "middle path" philosophy. Rather, what we're seeing is a rather extreme polarization. If you're not with us, you're against us. It's a disturbingly easy sell, owing largely to the fact that any decent person will agree that nazis are bad. If nazis are bad, then you need to be against nazis, and if you're not living up to our standards of what "against nazis" entails, then that must be because you're on their side. The unspoken threat of being labeled as on the nazis' side is enough to make a lot of people conform. And it's... understandable. Being labeled as a "nazi sympathizer" carries significant social stigma.
> 
> But it's also a bludgeon and a thought-terminating cliche, and calling on it to silence and/or shame people into conformity is not a good way to build a healthy community. Some years ago the thought-terminating cliche _du jour_ was "rape apologist". Now it's "nazi sympathizer". We - all of us - need to recognize that in many cases, these phrases are applied dubiously, for the purpose of justifying ignoring positions the speaker doesn't agree with. (As well as being quite hurtful to the people unfairly labeled such.)


Damn labelers. I hate those kinds of people, the kind who would label people who don't do what they do as the things they hate. Why would I do what any group says? I'm not even interested in their silly faux-political battles, because what they are and what they do is purely toxic. So I don't go anywhere near them. Usually. Except in this case, I guess.
Screw you, I'm on My own side. Lone Rider, don't need anyone! Not your crap, not their crap, I don't deal with ANYONE'S crap. 


BennyJackdaw said:


> You're just coming off as an elitist acting like a martyr.
> Is that wrong, though? To play games, roleplay, heck even come up with imaginary characters that hang around with you everywhere you go to take your mind off the grim reality, which unfortunately is actually very bleak? I'll admit, I DO go to lengths to get by in life, because I'll admit again I hate the state of the world as it is, and though I try to do what I can to help the world, there's only so much one person can do. To take my mind off of reality, I often times imagine that my characters are around to talk to me. I know they're not real, but because they're not, they can stick with me. I don't see how that makes a person crazy or socially inept, it just means they have an active imagination.


I agree with this though.


----------



## Yakamaru (Dec 26, 2017)

Troj said:


> But, I think the rcent insanity around Trump, Antifa, SJWs, Nazis and the Furry Raiders has started to force the fandom at large to confront how to navigate the middle path when it comes to setting boundaries and enforcing rules.


And how are we going to "enforce" rules on people across borders? Hell, how are we going to "enforce" *anything* across as short as city to city, let alone a fandom? You can't enforce ideals. You can't enforce values. You can't enforce behaviour or actions. You can't enforce anything unless you're part of staff on a forum such as FAF, which is limited to FAF only. Even then, you can only enforce what is acceptable behaviour in that very limited space, not thoughts, ideals, actions or views outside of the forum.

The moment someone simply says "no" no one can do anything.



> One of the great and terrible things about the fandom is that it's extremely open and accepting. Lots of us will agree that too many furries don't know how to navigate "broken stairs," bad behaviors, and weird conflicts because they're nervous and don't want to be seen as mean or exclusionary.


Being extremely open, accepting and tolerating have its downsides, just like a lot of other things. You have to set hard limits for yourself and to be consistent on them, or you will end up being forcefully associated with sexual deviants to criminals, through social dynamics and how people associate with the different stuff. The idea that Furry = Dogfucker might, just might, have some sort of indication on where we should start?

Depending on the company you keep and/or associate with, people are going to react accordingly. Same goes for inside and outside the fandom. Quite frankly, I am not going to shy away from being exclusionary, as there are people I just don't want to associate let alone interact with.



> As for the matter of widespread social awkwardness in the fandom, well, I'm certainly doing my small part to help furs with that piece as best I can. I think the fandom would benefit from folks gaining some clarity and consensus around basic Do's and Don't's, and generally agreeing that it "takes a village" and that we each need to "be the change."


I appreciate you helping on the socially awkward part.

And I agree that we should try and establish some common sense Do's and Don't's as basic guidelines. However, we can't force anyone to acknowledge the guidelines, only try and have people listen and at the very least, understand.

You are only responsible for yourself. However, that doesn't mean you can't criticize the actions or lack there of by others.



> Similarly, we should continue to insist that people confine their kinky and sexual behaviors to the appropriate times and right places with consenting partners--but, at the same time, we need to steer clear of the Puritanical head trip that would insist that the fandom is only legitimate if it can prove it's totally G-rated and asexual. When certain mundanes insist on seeing the entire fandom as just a pure sex fest despite ample available evidence to the contrary, they're the ones with the problem, not us.


"Keep shit to yourself" is a pretty decent guideline. No one needs to know about your kinks, fetishes(sexual and otherwise), your interests nor your sexuality. If people ask however, feel free to give some information.

This fandom's gotten pretty damn sexualized, whether we like it or not. Might as well embrace it as part of the fandom. However, that doesn't mean we should glorify it, far from it.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 26, 2017)

dogryme6 said:


> Ohai what I wanted to do to, how's it going holding up the fort? Ah, doing fine? Being sharp, being fresh? Gooood...
> 
> I guess that's a good middle ground I could agree on.
> 
> ...



So what do you think on this matter?


----------



## Troj (Dec 26, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> I disagree - what I've observed is far from any kind of "middle path" philosophy. Rather, what we're seeing is a rather extreme polarization. If you're not with us, you're against us.



To be clear, my point was that recent conflicts and blowups in the fandom are finally forcing the community to finally confront things that it's previously been content to shove under the rug, so _that_ we might someday find that middle path between being (for example) a Burned Fur and just allowing a total free-for-all.

The fandom's mostly been able to get away with putting off these discussions and letting things be, and we've reached the point where that's not sustainable anymore. That's what I meant.



Yakamaru said:


> And how are we going to "enforce" rules on people across borders?



Most people already have a general idea of what it ideally means to be courteous or appropriate as a furry, I'd say--so, when I talk about basic norms or standard rules, that's usually what I'm referring to.

What furries particularly struggle with, I think, is how react to various kinds of rude, obnoxious, or inappropriate behavior; how to properly verify and act on information about toxic people in the fandom; and how to hold someone accountable for bad behavior, even when they're talented, charismatic, "nice," or "popufur."

Speaking of borders, a big consistent dilemma in the fandom is how to deal with people who did something genuinely shitty in a particular milieu (e.g., Discord, Telegram, Twitter, Facebook, a local meet, a convention, etc.) and who have now crossed over into other milieus or environments. When someone feels they've effectively gotten away with a bad behavior--or worse, were actually rewarded for that behavior--they'll typically keep doing it. Dealing with this type of problem is complicated by the fact that furries love to gossip, and so you'll also tend to hear a lot of exaggerated or fake rumors about people who are basically fine.  Not sure how to solve this--assuming that there is any solution here--but it is a persistent problem for sure.


----------



## dogryme6 (Dec 26, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> So what do you think on this matter?


Depends what matter you're talking about. If you mean why furries are frowned upon, it's because the fandom became pretty much the designated "safe space" for anyone who wasn't accepted by other groups. It was so easy a lot of gays and autistic people did it, and now rude people have no qualms about calling furries that. I actually have autism, so I'm REALLY not helping that statistic.
If you mean the whole shebang about the controversial groups quoting_mango brought up, I'd rather avoid that issue entirely. Let's face it, they're all radicals wanting to fight for one reason or another, and I disagree that violence solves everything. In fact, it resolves nothing except in giving real people, real injuries, and real deaths. That helps nothing. I'm not sure if I should include Trump or not in that whole selection of groups until he starts a war, but if there's actual real Trump sympathizer groups who are just as racist and white supremacist as anyone would assume, who think it's right to attack people, then I frown upon them too.
I want to say people are better than that but evidence always seems to prove the contrary, and thus I withdraw any cards of niceness I hold in my deck and say those who do not wish to improve can go screw themselves.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 26, 2017)

dogryme6 said:


> Depends what matter you're talking about. If you mean why furries are frowned upon, it's because the fandom became pretty much the designated "safe space" for anyone who wasn't accepted by other groups. It was so easy a lot of gays and autistic people did it, and now rude people have no qualms about calling furries that. I actually have autism, so I'm REALLY not helping that statistic.
> If you mean the whole shebang about the controversial groups quoting_mango brought up, I'd rather avoid that issue entirely. Let's face it, they're all radicals wanting to fight for one reason or another, and I disagree that violence solves everything. In fact, it resolves nothing except in giving real people, real injuries, and real deaths. That helps nothing. I'm not sure if I should include Trump or not in that whole selection of groups until he starts a war, but if there's actual real Trump sympathizer groups who are just as racist and white supremacist as anyone would assume, who think it's right to attack people, then I frown upon them too.
> I want to say people are better than that but evidence always seems to prove the contrary, and thus I withdraw any cards of niceness I hold in my deck and say those who do not wish to improve can go screw themselves.



Right, the furry community seems very accepting of LGBTs, autistic people, pretty much everyone really, except white supremacists and their ilk hopefully, which is great by me.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Dec 26, 2017)

Troj said:


> The fandom's mostly been able to get away with putting off these discussions and letting things be, and we've reached the point where that's not sustainable anymore. That's what I meant.


With all due respect, if the events that lead to my resignation from FA staff are an example of "improvement", I think we're better off without it. I refuse to believe the only way to a good solution is one that involves libel and borderline death threats. Yes, this is a sore spot for me; I think you can understand why that is. (I also personally don't think that disapproving of bully tactics should be a very controversial position, but some people really do believe the "right" ends justify any means.) I'm hardly the only one who has received similar treatment, though I have no way of knowing whether the allegations made against others have had more substance to them than what was said about me.



Yakamaru said:


> Being extremely open, accepting and tolerating have its downsides, just like a lot of other things. You have to set hard limits for yourself and to be consistent on them, or you will end up being forcefully associated with sexual deviants to criminals, through social dynamics and how people associate with the different stuff. The idea that Furry = Dogfucker might, just might, have some sort of indication on where we should start?
> 
> Depending on the company you keep and/or associate with, people are going to react accordingly. Same goes for inside and outside the fandom. Quite frankly, I am not going to shy away from being exclusionary, as there are people I just don't want to associate let alone interact with.


I think key here is personal choice. If someone is rude, obnoxious, or makes you uncomfortable, it's entirely appropriate to refuse to associate with them any further. If you feel they might endanger others, you may also be justified warning your friends. But not everyone draws the same lines, or draws them the same way, so it's probably a good idea to be very careful in assigning guilt by association. And it's not appropriate to do what some people do, going around encouraging others to pre-emptively block a person because of some conflict that really only concerns the two of you. A lot of the time, calmly telling someone "if you're going to act like this, I'm not going to continue this conversation" and sticking to it will work remarkably well.

I don't have to like all of my friends' friends, and I have a right to voice my concern if I think the relationship might do my friend a harm, but I do not have a right to police who my friends associate with, nor should I try. 

But we also need to give people space to make amends. It should not matter what mistakes someone made in the past, if they are making efforts to move past those events and doing better. There is no good hard-and-fast rule for how much time should pass before someone can be offered a chance to show they've improved, as it will vary both with the offense and what they are about to be trusted with, but I think a good starting point is this: if you show me basic respect, I will show you basic respect. 

Are there people in fandom I don't want anything to do with? Yes, absolutely. But I don't think _my_ beef with them should be reason for ALL THE FURRIES to shun them. It's between me and them, and I'm happy enough keeping it that way.


----------



## Troj (Dec 26, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> With all due respect, if the events that lead to my resignation from FA staff are an example of "improvement", I think we're better off without it. I refuse to believe the only way to a good solution is one that involves libel and borderline death threats. Yes, this is a sore spot for me; I think you can understand why that is. (I also personally don't think that disapproving of bully tactics should be a very controversial position, but some people really do believe the "right" ends justify any means.) I'm hardly the only one who has received similar treatment, though I have no way of knowing whether the allegations made against others have had more substance to them than what was said about me.



You misunderstand me. These current conflicts and blowups are _not_ good, healthy, or fun--far from it.  I'm definitely not happy about the fandom having to deal with Nazis, SJWs, trolls, pedophiles, and FA drama.

But, these conflicts _are_ forcing the fandom to confront questions and issues that every community has to deal with sooner or later. That's the silver lining, because it means the fandom has the opportunity to grow, improve, and maybe fix some lingering problems, instead of just eternally half-assing along. 

It's rather like how I initially ignored my little cold until it turned into a major hacking cough. When I could no longer ignore how sick I actually was, it forced me to put on the brakes and take care of myself, like I should've been doing all along. 



quoting_mungo said:


> I think key here is personal choice. If someone is rude, obnoxious, or makes you uncomfortable, it's entirely appropriate to refuse to associate with them any further. If you feel they might endanger others, you may also be justified warning your friends. But not everyone draws the same lines, or draws them the same way, so it's probably a good idea to be very careful in assigning guilt by association. And it's not appropriate to do what some people do, going around encouraging others to pre-emptively block a person because of some conflict that really only concerns the two of you. A lot of the time, calmly telling someone "if you're going to act like this, I'm not going to continue this conversation" and sticking to it will work remarkably well.



That's a fair piece of advice, I think!

One valuable nugget I'm picking up here is that more furries could stand to learn to stay out of conflicts that don't directly impact or concern them. Furries should also think twice before dogpiling someone based on an assumption or something they heard through the grapevine.



quoting_mungo said:


> But we also need to give people space to make amends. It should not matter what mistakes someone made in the past, if they are making efforts to move past those events and doing better. There is no good hard-and-fast rule for how much time should pass before someone can be offered a chance to show they've improved, as it will vary both with the offense and what they are about to be trusted with, but I think a good starting point is this: if you show me basic respect, I will show you basic respect.



Also fair! I agree. (Mind you, there are some extreme crimes that shouldn't be forgiven, but we should cross those bridges when we come to them.)

You are correct that a lot of this depends on the situation--and, again, the corresponding problem there is that some furs have trouble gauging these situational factors, because they lack social experience and/or awareness.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 26, 2017)

Troj said:


> You misunderstand me. These current conflicts and blowups are _not_ good, healthy, or fun--far from it.  I'm definitely not happy about the fandom having to deal with Nazis, SJWs, trolls, pedophiles, and FA drama.
> 
> But, these conflicts _are_ forcing the fandom to confront questions and issues that every community has to deal with sooner or later. That's the silver lining, because it means the fandom has the opportunity to grow, improve, and maybe fix some lingering problems, instead of just eternally half-assing along.
> 
> ...



It's ultimately up to the individuals of the fandom to denounce things such as pedophilic porn, and encourage people to be emotionally mature in denouncing actions that people perform that are specifically unethical, ask these people why they're behaving in this manner, and create open and honest debate with them, which reveals their actions and intentions to others and allows them to be held accountable.


----------



## Yakamaru (Dec 26, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> I think key here is personal choice. If someone is rude, obnoxious, or makes you uncomfortable, it's entirely appropriate to refuse to associate with them any further. If you feel they might endanger others, you may also be justified warning your friends. But not everyone draws the same lines, or draws them the same way, so it's probably a good idea to be very careful in assigning guilt by association. And it's not appropriate to do what some people do, going around encouraging others to pre-emptively block a person because of some conflict that really only concerns the two of you. A lot of the time, calmly telling someone "if you're going to act like this, I'm not going to continue this conversation" and sticking to it will work remarkably well.
> 
> I don't have to like all of my friends' friends, and I have a right to voice my concern if I think the relationship might do my friend a harm, but I do not have a right to police who my friends associate with, nor should I try.
> 
> ...


Of course. I won't get in the way of people's personal choices. I do however want to point out that their personal choices can and will have an affect on everyone else, especially if their personal choices are being made in public. It also becomes important to discern whom you want to associate with and what you do when the ones you associate/interact with end up doing illegal and/or degenerate shit. If you ignore their actions you're no better than the ones you associate/interact with. 

And when you have a fandom that supposedly have 17%+ zoophiles.. Well, the social stigma of being labeled a dogfucker is well deserved by the trash who are.


----------



## Troj (Dec 26, 2017)

If someone's behavior is unduly imposing on or causing harm to others, we need to jump on that, stat. This includes behaviors which disrupt or threaten meets or cons.

If someone's behavior is just weird, annoying, awkward, rude, or not to our liking, there are usually lots of low-key ways to address that, depending.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Dec 27, 2017)

Troj said:


> But, these conflicts _are_ forcing the fandom to confront questions and issues that every community has to deal with sooner or later. That's the silver lining, because it means the fandom has the opportunity to grow, improve, and maybe fix some lingering problems, instead of just eternally half-assing along.


I'm honestly concerned; the current situation may force the fandom to deal (in an exceptionally ham-fisted way) with issues like the presence of white supremacists and the uniform fetishists who get lumped in with them, but _because_ things were brought to a head by "nazis", the narrative is seriously skewed. No one (well... very few people - I've seen significantly more people suggest that I'm lying about having been suicidal for sympathy or attention than have questioned the events that pushed me that far) wants to be the one to say "hey, guys, you crossed a line in how you went after this person" if the person in question is an alleged nazi. The risk here is that we go from being the fandom that welcome everyone, to the fandom that won't own its shitty behavior against "undesirables". The fact that one "side" is branded (whether deserved or not; doesn't matter right now) after one of the more deplorable regimes in modern history invites a casting of the other "side" as The Good Guys, and that comes with its own host of problems.



Troj said:


> One valuable nugget I'm picking up here is that more furries could stand to learn to stay out of conflicts that don't directly impact or concern them. Furries should also think twice before dogpiling someone based on an assumption or something they heard through the grapevine.


Very much so. Also worth considering is that if a person doesn't change their behavior after two or three people tell them there's a problem, getting dogpiled by dozens of people is more likely to make them resistant to change than to change their mind. Mobbing people who you think did something wrong is just not an effective means of addressing the issue.



Troj said:


> Also fair! I agree. (Mind you, there are some extreme crimes that shouldn't be forgiven, but we should cross those bridges when we come to them.)


There is, mind you, a difference between forgiveness and allowing people to grow past bad acts. You can remember that someone did a bad thing, and be appropriately cautious, without shunning them entirely (as a society). The base principle of showing others at _least_ as much respect/courtesy as they show you is still a good starting point, though. 



BahgDaddy said:


> It's ultimately up to the individuals of the fandom to denounce things such as pedophilic porn, and encourage people to be emotionally mature in denouncing actions that people perform that are specifically unethical, ask these people why they're behaving in this manner, and create open and honest debate with them, which reveals their actions and intentions to others and allows them to be held accountable.


There's a lot more nuance to what you dismiss as "pedophilic porn" than that term implies. Keep in mind that child pornography (as in, inappropriate photographs of real children) is illegal in large part due to documenting and creating demand for real abuse. I'd personally welcome law that prohibits free sharing of most media documenting illegal actions, with some regulated exceptions. I don't particularly approve of fictional sexual content featuring prepubescent individuals, but I have to acknowledge that it in itself causes no harm. Many of the people who consume this content also identify with the child, not the perpetrator, so I'm not sure pedophilia ("love of children") is a particularly apt term, any more than it's apt to suggest anyone with a rape kink summarily wishes to commit rape.

You are of course free to form your own opinion. I'm just offering another perspective. I would also suggest, in general, being careful with loaded terms such as "pedophilia", as they have a nasty habit of dragging conversations from a rational to an emotional plane. 



Yakamaru said:


> I do however want to point out that their personal choices can and will have an affect on everyone else, especially if their personal choices are being made in public. It also becomes important to discern whom you want to associate with and what you do when the ones you associate/interact with end up doing illegal and/or degenerate shit. If you ignore their actions you're no better than the ones you associate/interact with.


I did point out that announcements like "everyone should block this guy" are inappropriate; the same goes for publicly announcing that you are now blocking this particular person. Beyond that, eh. If observing someone leaving the room when another person enters influences your (gen) opinion of one person or the other, that's part of regular social interaction patterns. You have the choice of staying or going. 

I do have to disagree with your notion of guilt by association. If you stand quiet nearby observing your friend break into a car or assault someone, sure, that says nothing good about you (usual caveats about fear of repercussions if coming forward or intervening etc apply). But I don't think it's fair to shoulder someone with a burden of having to support every one of a friend's opinions and actions, and it's not always possible for an outsider to know what has or has not happened to address a situation. Maybe you told your friend that no, seriously, spraypainting a dick on the wall of the retirement home was not cool or funny, and that could be enough to address the situation far as your friendship is concerned. Maybe you rolled your eyes and decided he'll learn when he gets busted. You still didn't _do_ it. You're not obligated to be your friends' full-time conscience.



Yakamaru said:


> And when you have a fandom that supposedly have 17%+ zoophiles.. Well, the social stigma of being labeled a dogfucker is well deserved by the trash who are.


Maybe the fandom has 17%+ people who identify as zoophiles. Maybe not. We've already been over how unreliable the surveys we have are in terms of providing a representative sample of fandom, multiple times. That doesn't, however, say anything about how many people have acted on their attraction. The term "dogfucker" is designed to evoke an emotional response, one that in many cases is disproportionate from the actions of the person being labeled such. Just consider this: there are people whose job involves sticking most of their arms into the anus of cows and horses. They're called vets. Breeding horses often involves touching horse dick (because some stallions just have awful aim, or because you're collecting semen for insemination). Clearly neither act is inherently immoral. But if you called a livestock vet "cowfister" you could probably ruin their career, and you'd still be more accurate than "dogfucker" often is when it gets thrown around.

I personally reserve judgment for where there's demonstrable malice or harm. That's also pretty much local law, so...


----------



## Yakamaru (Dec 27, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> I did point out that announcements like "everyone should block this guy" are inappropriate; the same goes for publicly announcing that you are now blocking this particular person. Beyond that, eh. If observing someone leaving the room when another person enters influences your (gen) opinion of one person or the other, that's part of regular social interaction patterns. You have the choice of staying or going.
> 
> I do have to disagree with your notion of guilt by association. If you stand quiet nearby observing your friend break into a car or assault someone, sure, that says nothing good about you (usual caveats about fear of repercussions if coming forward or intervening etc apply). But I don't think it's fair to shoulder someone with a burden of having to support every one of a friend's opinions and actions, and it's not always possible for an outsider to know what has or has not happened to address a situation. Maybe you told your friend that no, seriously, spraypainting a dick on the wall of the retirement home was not cool or funny, and that could be enough to address the situation far as your friendship is concerned. Maybe you rolled your eyes and decided he'll learn when he gets busted. You still didn't _do_ it. You're not obligated to be your friends' full-time conscience.


Yeah, no. I am not going to shout out "everyone should block this person" and advocate for people to block. That's moronic. I am perhaps going to comment on it, block and/or leave the group. Or I might just end up silently leaving due to not wanting to cause any drama. It completely depends on the situation and what have been said and/or done. 

And no, no friend should shoulder all the burdens of all their associates/friends. Help shoulder some of them, maybe, depending on what they are. Any respectable friend will call you out on your bullshit. A good friend will call you out on your bullshit AND tell you to stop it while giving ideas on how to prevent such crappy behaviour in the future.



quoting_mungo said:


> Maybe the fandom has 17%+ people who identify as zoophiles. Maybe not. We've already been over how unreliable the surveys we have are in terms of providing a representative sample of fandom, multiple times. That doesn't, however, say anything about how many people have acted on their attraction. The term "dogfucker" is designed to evoke an emotional response, one that in many cases is disproportionate from the actions of the person being labeled such. Just consider this: there are people whose job involves sticking most of their arms into the anus of cows and horses. They're called vets. Breeding horses often involves touching horse dick (because some stallions just have awful aim, or because you're collecting semen for insemination). Clearly neither act is inherently immoral. But if you called a livestock vet "cowfister" you could probably ruin their career, and you'd still be more accurate than "dogfucker" often is when it gets thrown around.
> 
> I personally reserve judgment for where there's demonstrable malice or harm. That's also pretty much local law, so...


Maybe the fandom have 17%+ zoophiles, maybe it doesn't. Even if the numbers were half of that in actuality it's still a stupidly high number of zoophiles. We don't see this level let alone degree of degeneracy and sexual deviancy in any other fandom. Quite frankly, if people want the fandom to have the social stigma of being sexual deviants it's their choice. I am going to sit back and watch the drama and stupid unfold.

Just like pedophilia, it's a mental illness, IMO, and people need treatment for it. Even if only the attraction is there and someone don't act upon that attraction, I still find it vile and disgusting and want nothing to do with such people. Though I am not going to go out of my way to find out what you do in the privacy of your own home. If you talk about that shit in public however, like on a Discord server.. Well, don't be surprised when people find you to be a degenerate.

As for vets/farmers: It's a job, not an attraction. They don't get a hardon from touching the horse's dick, which is a tiiiiny bit different.


----------



## quoting_mungo (Dec 27, 2017)

Yakamaru said:


> Just like pedophilia, it's a mental illness, IMO, and people need treatment for it. Even if only the attraction is there and someone don't act upon that attraction, I still find it vile and disgusting and want nothing to do with such people.


And you have the right to make the choice to not associate with someone based on whatever you damn well please. However, if you truly believe zoophilia to be a mental illness, it's incredibly shitty of you to call people suffering from it degenerates or trash. You don't attack people for having a mental illness. 



Yakamaru said:


> As for vets/farmers: It's a job, not an attraction. They don't get a hardon from touching the horse's dick, which is a tiiiiny bit different.


It's pretty well established that human sexuality is pretty fuzzy at the edges, and that one of the things that tend to cause physical arousal especially in men is watching sex. Any sex. So someone working at a covering station could quite plausibly pop a stiffy from it. Still their job.

Either way, the point was to illustrate that things we're quick to denounce in one context are not as black-and-white immoral as we sometimes like to think. And if there is nothing inherently unethical about it, then rejecting people for fantasizing about it would, I feel, fall under the heading of thought crime.


----------



## Okami_No_Heishi (Dec 27, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> And you have the right to make the choice to not associate with someone based on whatever you damn well please. However, if you truly believe zoophilia to be a mental illness, it's incredibly shitty of you to call people suffering from it degenerates or trash. You don't attack people for having a mental illness.
> 
> 
> It's pretty well established that human sexuality is pretty fuzzy at the edges, and that one of the things that tend to cause physical arousal especially in men is watching sex. Any sex. So someone working at a covering station could quite plausibly pop a stiffy from it. Still their job.
> ...


I read in a Furry News article what had happened with you while I was away. They were wrong about you. They were wrong how they came at you. They were wrong! I always liked you, and appreciated your neutrality! I was shocked and saddened to hear of furries treating another furry the way they treated you. Stay fuzzy My Friend!!


----------



## dogryme6 (Dec 27, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> And you have the right to make the choice to not associate with someone based on whatever you damn well please. However, if you truly believe zoophilia to be a mental illness, it's incredibly shitty of you to call people suffering from it degenerates or trash. You don't attack people for having a mental illness.
> 
> It's pretty well established that human sexuality is pretty fuzzy at the edges, and that one of the things that tend to cause physical arousal especially in men is watching sex. Any sex. So someone working at a covering station could quite plausibly pop a stiffy from it. Still their job.
> 
> Either way, the point was to illustrate that things we're quick to denounce in one context are not as black-and-white immoral as we sometimes like to think. And if there is nothing inherently unethical about it, then rejecting people for fantasizing about it would, I feel, fall under the heading of thought crime.



Agreement with that first part! If zoophilia is a fetish for animals, according to yaka's logic all fetishists have a mental illness and should be attacked for it! Bruh yer' mighty reminding me of the 1800's when people refused to actually deal with cerebral paulsy or autism properly and just threw them in basements and attics and mental institutions.
Mmhmm, human sexuality gets a liiittle weird at times. If you're ever wondering why the heck people out there love plants or furniture or anything else bizarre to love except for at least another human, of the right gender if you're even more stringent, well, that's just what those do! A bit unfortunate for some of them, they'll never know what normal sex is like. And while a select few kinds of fetishists ARE dangerous to society (paedos mainly, but zoophiliacs can also provoke a strong response) most other types, I would argue, are harmless. I do however recommend not doing any sexual things while on the job, for obvious reasons.
A good last paragraph to end on! The strange is not as evil as others would make it out to be, except for in a few cases as I had mentioned. Some of these things are just fantasies, and why should you care about those?


----------



## Troj (Dec 27, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> The risk here is that we go from being the fandom that welcome everyone, to the fandom that won't own its shitty behavior against "undesirables". The fact that one "side" is branded (whether deserved or not; doesn't matter right now) after one of the more deplorable regimes in modern history invites a casting of the other "side" as The Good Guys, and that comes with its own host of problems.



Oh, true enough.

When people--even good people who are opposing a genuine evil---become completely convinced of their own moral purity, and believe that everything they do is necessarily correct and right, that's an eventual recipe for disaster.

It's important and good to take ethical stands, but to my mind, you should never lose sight of your own shortcomings and flaws, and step back and think when you notice yourself rationalizing or excusing something you'd normally consider wrong.



quoting_mungo said:


> You can remember that someone did a bad thing, and be appropriately cautious, without shunning them entirely (as a society). The base principle of showing others at _least_ as much respect/courtesy as they show you is still a good starting point, though.



Sure.

You can also bar someone from certain events, forums, or gatherings without going out of your way to abuse or attack them, just as you can choose not to socialize with somebody as an individual without making a big production out of it.

At the end of the day, there just need to be consistent, logical, appropriate consequences for bad behavior.

Re: Zoophilia, the percentage of zoophiles in the fandom is roughly equivalent to the percentage of zoophiles in the general population. This suggests (at least to me) that furries aren't uniquely predisposed to zoophilia, which I'd consider good news.

Re: Pedophilia, zoophilia, and more, my feeling is that you can fantasize to your heart's content about imaginary or fictional scenes, and that having a "problematic" or "icky" fetish doesn't make you an inherently evil person. (My worry is that is that branding people with these inclinations as absolute monsters may potentially drive them into the shadows and discourage them from getting help or treatment, and that this may increase the chances that they'll eventually hurt an innocent being.) Bottom line, what matters is what you do. If your sexual activities involve non-consenting parties in any way, that is wrong, period.


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 27, 2017)

I don't put pedophilia and zoophilia in the same category. As the both stand, as possible defects of the human mind, are surely harmless when kept within the mind, and become different when exercised. Pedophilia causes immediate and irreparable harm to a child, because their minds cannot cope with such things, whereas the argument (gross as it seems) can be made that animals aren't harmed by such activity. 

And no, I'm not saying, go screw your dog and be merry, but I am saying they're not in the same imperative category. 

And I will critisize pedophilic art as be being extremely ethical suspect.


----------



## Deleted member 115426 (Dec 27, 2017)

BahgDaddy said:


> I don't put pedophilia and zoophilia in the same category. As the both stand, as possible defects of the human mind, are surely harmless when kept within the mind, and become different when exercised. Pedophilia causes immediate and irreparable harm to a child, because their minds cannot cope with such things, whereas the argument (gross as it seems) can be made that animals aren't harmed by such activity.
> 
> And no, I'm not saying, go screw your dog and be merry, but I am saying they're not in the same imperative category.
> 
> And I will critisize pedophilic art as be being extremely ethical suspect.


*hides my stash of cub porn* :V


----------



## BahgDaddy (Dec 27, 2017)

Troj said:


> Oh, true enough.
> 
> When people--even good people who are opposing a genuine evil---become completely convinced of their own moral purity, and believe that everything they do is necessarily correct and right, that's an eventual recipe for disaster.
> 
> ...



About 1-4% for general population, 17% for furry community. 

I mean come on. You've got a bunch of art of animal people fucking each other and you're surprised?


----------



## Yakamaru (Dec 27, 2017)

quoting_mungo said:


> And you have the right to make the choice to not associate with someone based on whatever you damn well please. However, if you truly believe zoophilia to be a mental illness, it's incredibly shitty of you to call people suffering from it degenerates or trash. You don't attack people for having a mental illness.


Yes, I find it in my opinion to be a mental illness. Doesn't mean I can't look upon it as vile, disgusting and/or degeneracy. They are not mutually exclusive. This is not a mental illness you have from birth. It's one that you gain over time and/or from specific situations. It's a sexuality-driven mental illness, IMO.

There is attacking people, and there is holding an opinion. If I wanted to attack people, I would do so explicitly and directly. Holding any specific *opinion* is not attacking anyone.



quoting_mungo said:


> It's pretty well established that human sexuality is pretty fuzzy at the edges, and that one of the things that tend to cause physical arousal especially in men is watching sex. Any sex. So someone working at a covering station could quite plausibly pop a stiffy from it. Still their job.
> 
> Either way, the point was to illustrate that things we're quick to denounce in one context are not as black-and-white immoral as we sometimes like to think. And if there is nothing inherently unethical about it, then rejecting people for fantasizing about it would, I feel, fall under the heading of thought crime.


A lot of things have grey zones. Sexuality is one of them. And that includes the opportunity to hold whatever opinion you see fit, and associate with whatever people you see fit. It's like associating yourself with similar if not identical beliefs. That is not thought crime. That is social dynamics doing its job. If I don't want to associate myself with people who find animals sexually attractive that is my right as an individual. If you find holding the *opinion* that zoophilia is disgusting and a mental illness to be shitty of me, then go ahead. I don't care. 



dogryme6 said:


> Agreement with that first part! If zoophilia is a fetish for animals, according to yaka's logic all fetishists have a mental illness and should be attacked for it! Bruh yer' mighty reminding me of the 1800's when people refused to actually deal with cerebral paulsy or autism properly and just threw them in basements and attics and mental institutions.
> Mmhmm, human sexuality gets a liiittle weird at times. If you're ever wondering why the heck people out there love plants or furniture or anything else bizarre to love except for at least another human, of the right gender if you're even more stringent, well, that's just what those do! A bit unfortunate for some of them, they'll never know what normal sex is like. And while a select few kinds of fetishists ARE dangerous to society (paedos mainly, but zoophiliacs can also provoke a strong response) most other types, I would argue, are harmless. I do however recommend not doing any sexual things while on the job, for obvious reasons.
> A good last paragraph to end on! The strange is not as evil as others would make it out to be, except for in a few cases as I had mentioned. Some of these things are just fantasies, and why should you care about those?


That... have to be one of the biggest leaps of logic and assumptions I've seen this year.

"According to Yaka's logic". Have you even read what I've written, or have you just seen a couple words here and there and made huge leaps in assumptions? Where am I explicitly attacking anyone? Holding an opinion is not attacking anyone. If I wanted to attack someone I would do so explicitly and directly.

My only "logic" is to keep your shit to yourself, in the comfort of your own privacy. If you find people who like the same shit, great! However, don't be surprised that people can and will react negatively if they come across it, or get it thrust in their face. Especially when in public, like on a Discord server and/or a forum.


----------



## perkele (Dec 30, 2017)

Because their wieners look like grotesque chili peppers.


----------

