Furry != Bestiality

[Aphex Demon]

I initally smell 4chan. Thats all I have to say.

 

[TimeLord]

So...umm yea, while yes there are clear differences if you sit down and try to think why people like furies (it's sexualizing animals with human physical characteristics)

Being a furry is not about sex. I should know, I am one.
People assume sexualisation because of the media portrayed around furries.

Deviant art doesn't do anything to help my argument either....

But seriously. Watch this;

http://vimeo.com/17995012

The guy near the end explains my entire argument.

Ok, first off, not to sound like a dick, but I'm not about to go jump into a 37 minute video or accept blindly that it will somehow/somewhere have some sort of counter to my whole argument. Seriously, I'm not a fan of someone taking a tiny snippet of someone's argument, saying they disagree with it and thus saying it's somehow negating the rest of the argument. It doesn't.
Really sorry, but unless there is more to the arguing against my point I'm not about to go spend half an hour watching a video, that I'm pretty sure won't counter my argument about the definition you're trying to convince people to believe.

You're saying you're going to deny a person's argument because you can't be assed to even know what the fuck their argument is?

You do realise that voids any opinion you might have in any future argument on the subject right? You understand that you have made all your arguments invalid? Yes?

No. Refusing to sit and watch a thirty-six minute video does not void his arguments. TimeLord could have easily stated his argument through typing. If he can't be arsed to type his argument, Rednog shouldn't be expected to be arsed to go find it.

Rule of thumb. If you're hanging out on the escapist, you clearly have time on your hands. Refusing to learn with deeper knowledge something that Timelord felt needed to be expressed by another, more skilled speaker is just pure laziness.

Thirty six minutes is too much. Don't pretend it isn't. Even in bandwidth terms its not worth it.

You would rather make your argument uninformed? That video explains the stigmas of the community, has interviews with different people about being furries and generally explains the idea of furries to an ignorant 3rd party.

 

[Daedalus1942]

If people are ignorant, and make ignorant comments, they are unlikely to change, seeing as they haven't tried to learn anything before they make their comments.
Still, some do learn, thankfully.
Maybe this will make a few people change their views. Maybe not. It can only be hoped that some more ignorance is wiped away.
Just don't expect things to change drastically >.>

Oh thank goodness. Heaven forbid anyone not be informed about some, reasonably obscure, reasonably disturbing - fetish.

Why people don't investigate these matters is beyond me, as is why uniformed people would want to comment on such an obviously controversial taste.

This thread is wallowing in self victimisation. Furries are not a severely persecuted group. In fact, the only time one recieves any bullying over the subject is when one forces it into the limelight. It is fantasising about beastiality though, to split hairs. Based on the definition alone. So that pretty much debunks the OPs thread.

Sometimes wiping away ignorance is a bad thing. The memory capacity of the brain is not infinite. Most people don't deserve having this bit of knowledge inflicted upon them. "Ignorance is bliss" has never seemed so true.

Pretty sure Bolt talks by the way, so it is (again splitting hairs) anthropomorthic (not to mention his face).

So...umm yea, while yes there are clear differences if you sit down and try to think why people like furies (it's sexualizing animals with human physical characteristics)

Being a furry is not about sex. I should know, I am one.
People assume sexualisation because of the media portrayed around furries.

Deviant art doesn't do anything to help my argument either....

But seriously. Watch this;

http://vimeo.com/17995012

The guy near the end explains my entire argument.

Ok, first off, not to sound like a dick, but I'm not about to go jump into a 37 minute video or accept blindly that it will somehow/somewhere have some sort of counter to my whole argument. Seriously, I'm not a fan of someone taking a tiny snippet of someone's argument, saying they disagree with it and thus saying it's somehow negating the rest of the argument. It doesn't.
Really sorry, but unless there is more to the arguing against my point I'm not about to go spend half an hour watching a video, that I'm pretty sure won't counter my argument about the definition you're trying to convince people to believe.

You're saying you're going to deny a person's argument because you can't be assed to even know what the fuck their argument is?

You do realise that voids any opinion you might have in any future argument on the subject right? You understand that you have made all your arguments invalid? Yes?

No. Refusing to sit and watch a thirty-six minute video does not void his arguments. TimeLord could have easily stated his argument through typing. If he can't be arsed to type his argument, Rednog shouldn't be expected to be arsed to go find it.

Rule of thumb. If you're hanging out on the escapist, you clearly have time on your hands. Refusing to learn with deeper knowledge something that Timelord felt needed to be expressed by another, more skilled speaker is just pure laziness.

Thirty six minutes is too much. Don't pretend it isn't. Even in bandwidth terms its not worth it.

Actually, you're wrong on pretty much all accounts in that post.

First of all furries are constantly persecuted against online.
Even if they don't make it well known.

I'm not furry myself, but I had a picture of Bunnie Rabbot (from the Sonic the Hedgehog universe) as my msn display picture and within about 10 minutes I had people on my msn list calling me sick twisted and a pervert. You are wrong on this account.

Secondly, most furries aren't even into the sexual "yiff" stuff, and they are furry simply because they desire to be in an animalistic body (not that disimilar from my own gender dysphoria). Some are into the sexualised stuff sure, but that's not primarily "furry".
That is a fetish they have. Even this fetish though is not even close to beastiality.

They fantasize about something that can not possibly exist, it is an intellectial property of someone's creation, therefore your opinions and biased closed-minded assumptions can not touch it.
The depiction within the art is not a real living, breathing thing.
I have NEVER met a furry (and I have several furry friends) who are into beastiality, most of them are repulsed by the idea.

Most of the time furries don't even get a sexual pleasure out of it, it's merely their desired body type and they feel only feel comfortable roleplaying as an Anthropomorph(just as I desire to transition to fully female one day and am altering my body to fit my mind and realise this reality).
Furries unfortunately do not have the same liberties as we haven't quite cracked the human genome and discovered how to alter genes or species.
You are just wrong, on every single point you have made in your post.
Your argument is completely null and void, and I'm off to sleep now.
-Tabs<3-

 

[Chairman Miaow]

I quite clearly stated in that thread that he was a zoophile, not a furry. So yeah, I get it.

Honestly, zoophilia and bestiality squick me the fuck out. It's similar to child molestation, in my eyes.
I'm trying to find the right words to describe it, but they are escaping me. It's like... okay. So you are forcing yourself on something that cannot fight back and is not really sure what you are doing. It cannot and probably would not consent.
That's not exactly it but it will have to do.

I'm okay with furries. I mean, it's not entirely about the kink, and even the parts that are tend to involve aware and consentual participants.
But zoophilia? Ugh. I suppose you can't control what you're into, and you are fine as long as you don't act on your urges. But still.
Just fucking ugh.

EDIT:

snip

Let me simplify this for you.
Take a transexual. A transexual is a man or woman who feels they are trapped in the wrong sex.
A male to female transexual IDENTIFIES as female. They may be into women. They may be bisexual. It's not about sexual attraction, it's about who they are and who they identify as.

Being a furry is sort of like that.
As far as I understand it, furries identify with anthropomorphic animals because, on some level, they feel THEMSELVES to be anthropomorphic animals. That's why you see all these fursonas everywhere. That is their way of becoming who they envision themselves to be.

I don't know if any furries feel trapped in their current bodies. Hell, I'm not sure if any of this is true, I'm not a furry, so I don't know.
This is just what I've picked up from snippets here and there.

To use your own argument against you. Comparing that furries identify more with anthropomorphic animals to transexuals identify more to people of the other sex is like saying people who are attracted to animals are like people attracted to the same sex. I'm not saying any of this is wrong, I just feel like it's not a very strong argument.

 

[HentMas]

Wait, wait, wait...back that train up!

*SCREEEEEECH* ok, i stopped, go ahead! i´m listening

Anthropomorphism does not equal half human half animal. Anthropomorphism is any non human thing whether living or not having human traits and or characteristics.

excelent explanation, i agree with you in every single point

From a majority of what I've seen in relation to furry art there is very little to link or to show that in fact many furies are indeed half human/human animal and evolved in some way or are genetically half-half for some reason. They are for all intensive purposes, genetically non-human. Yes there is art out there showing people transforming into furies but let's leave that for another debate.

OK, this is kind of a moot point, because you are not stating a fact, you are stating what you "found" to be true, wich seems obviously biased in my opinion, but anywhay, furryes dont need to "explain" the transformation because there is no need, you are getting scientific thought into a fantastic setting, of course there is no transformation, its all just a simil about "races" cats are this, dogs are that, and it tryes to make the point of it being the same as "diversity", in this "world" the furry fandom created for themselves there is NO need to be transformed, because they were born that way, its just playing with the idea of people being "HALVE" something, and if you start putting it as a "transformation" or a "mutation" it wouldnt be anything more than a bad "werewolf" adaptation, which most dont like. consider this, its a world created for people to find more people with the same interests, its like in The Elder Scrolls, there are giant talking lizards, well, there is not "explained" why there are gian talking lizards, they are a different race (think Asian/African/Latin/) and they are still treated like humans trough the game, they wouldnt be "halve human halve lizards" but for the purpose of description, what would you call them if you tryed to describe them to a guy that has never seen them before?? its the SAME concept, thats why i try to explain it to you even thought you asked not to go into details about this.

For example the character you posted, Krystal. Now I admit I haven't played Starfox, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I highly doubt that there is any mention in her back story or during the game that she is indeed part human part animal genetically.

again, not the point of being a furry

This is where you have to draw the fine line, being anthropomorphic means you can and are humanoid. They might look and act human, but they are definitely not human. Considering the basic definition of bestiality is is the practice of sex between humans and non-human animals, furries kind of fall into that category.

by your standards, in reality, Furryes are about taking the characteristics of certain animals (be it from common folk tales or actual natural characteristics) and choosing the ones you would like to have, then looking at which species there exist and finding which one fits your idea to portray yourselve, an avatar if you wish, which is no more strange than choosing a blood elf/female/warlock in world of warcraft.

So...umm yea, while yes there are clear differences if you sit down and try to think why people like furies (it's sexualizing animals with human physical characteristics)

i´m sorry, where did you took "SEXUALIZING" into the equation???, you are wrong my friend, i agree that its a part of the fandom, but its not all, there is a huge world out there about furryes and it doesnt all involve "Sex", there is your misconception and why you think "furry" goes in line with "sexual deviations" well, it doesnt.

you know there is a difference between liking that and a straight up animal.
Sorry to say it man, but people who call it bestiality are technically right.

hahaha, this made me laugh, seriously??? thats your whole point?? sexualization of an "animal" and its "bestiality" well, i have never seen anyone getting it on with a dog in the furry fandom, never, its all about the characterization of one self (and others) as a part of a different world, think pen and paper MMRPG were your avatar has animal characteristics (not your avatar is an animal with human characteristics, those are also two common missconceptions)

sorry friend, but you have it wrong in sooo many levels, you are missing the point entirely, and in a website about characterizing one self in hundreds of ways, i find it funny it slipped past you so hard, think fallout except you choos female / male / Race whith race being bunny/wolf/cat etc.

 

[HentMas]

To use your own argument against you. Comparing that furries identify more with anthropomorphic animals to transexuals identify more to people of the other sex is like saying people who are attracted to animals are like people attracted to the same sex. I'm not saying any of this is wrong, I just feel like it's not a very strong argument.

aha!, of course!!! you are right!!! furryes love animals, clearly you are right and EVERY SINGLE FURRY THAT HAS ANSWERED YOU IS WRONG

because Furrys STATING what they KNOW about the furry fandom are obviously WRONG about this, and you hold the ABSOLUTE THRUTH about the topic! showing your knowledge to the blind poor people that are the furrys, poor poor guys, brainwashed into believing they are not into bestiality, but really are because you know they are.

delusional people that cant DIFERENTIATE an IMAGINARY setting from a REAL one, that cant see that they are not thinking about NON EXISTANT beings like fairyes or hell, sucubus and all those fantastic things, they are actually trying to "f%&k" with your dog and your cat, THEY JUST DONT KNOW ABOUT IT

because you hold the absolut thruth about the topic, mind if i call you the "FURRY EXPERT"?? "sensei furry", "furry master"?? or what title would be worthy of such a magnificent knowledge on the subject??

 

[Daedalus1942]

I quite clearly stated in that thread that he was a zoophile, not a furry. So yeah, I get it.

Honestly, zoophilia and bestiality squick me the fuck out. It's similar to child molestation, in my eyes.
I'm trying to find the right words to describe it, but they are escaping me. It's like... okay. So you are forcing yourself on something that cannot fight back and is not really sure what you are doing. It cannot and probably would not consent.
That's not exactly it but it will have to do.

I'm okay with furries. I mean, it's not entirely about the kink, and even the parts that are tend to involve aware and consentual participants.
But zoophilia? Ugh. I suppose you can't control what you're into, and you are fine as long as you don't act on your urges. But still.
Just fucking ugh.

EDIT:

snip

Let me simplify this for you.
Take a transexual. A transexual is a man or woman who feels they are trapped in the wrong sex.
A male to female transexual IDENTIFIES as female. They may be into women. They may be bisexual. It's not about sexual attraction, it's about who they are and who they identify as.

Being a furry is sort of like that.
As far as I understand it, furries identify with anthropomorphic animals because, on some level, they feel THEMSELVES to be anthropomorphic animals. That's why you see all these fursonas everywhere. That is their way of becoming who they envision themselves to be.

I don't know if any furries feel trapped in their current bodies. Hell, I'm not sure if any of this is true, I'm not a furry, so I don't know.
This is just what I've picked up from snippets here and there.

To use your own argument against you. Comparing that furries identify more with anthropomorphic animals to transexuals identify more to people of the other sex is like saying people who are attracted to animals are like people attracted to the same sex. I'm not saying any of this is wrong, I just feel like it's not a very strong argument.

No, you've missed his point entirely.
He's comparing transsexuals like me to furries in the sense that we both don't feel comfortable in the body we were born in.
The difference being I can transition and alter my body to fit my mind.
Online fursona's and fursuits are the ONLY way they can even get remotely close to being who they want to be.
Sexual attraction does not even enter into it.
He is making the point that like transpeople such as myself who experience a dysphoria about their gender, furries experience a similar dysphoria that pertains to their species rather than their gender.
Furries can be sexualised through what is known as "yiff".
That is a fetish, similar to how trans-attracted people like "shemales".
It's a derogitory terms to a transwoman such as myself, but at the same time that is sexualised.
Gender dysphoria in of itself is not sexualised, just as furries not feeling comfortable as their born species are not sexualised either.
-Tabs<3-
-edit- Also, just to clarify I am not a furry myself but I have several furry friends and I would easily say I know alot more about the community than you do.

 

[Chairman Miaow]

snip

snip

snip

snip

snip

snip

snip

At no point id I say furries liked animals, in fact that is the opposite of what I was saying. I was just saying that it couldn't really be used as an argument, as it was all speculation.

Hentmas. Try to be civil.

Daedalus. Thank you for being civil.

 

[Daedalus1942]

I hope that helped to clear any misconceptions you may have had about furries. Now i'm off to sleep, take care.
-Tabs<3-

 

[HentMas]

At no point id I say furries liked animals, in fact that is the opposite of what I was saying. I was just saying that it couldn't really be used as an argument, as it was all speculation.

Hentmas. Try to be civil.

Daedalus. Thank you for being civil.

sorry sorry, i´m trying to be civil, i guess i took on the "cinical" approach too hard, i apologize

I´m a furry after all, and all this touches very sensitive spots :3

EDIT: and i was trying to quote someone else, not you! hahahaha

 

[Daedalus1942]

At no point id I say furries liked animals, in fact that is the opposite of what I was saying. I was just saying that it couldn't really be used as an argument, as it was all speculation.

Hentmas. Try to be civil.

Daedalus. Thank you for being civil.

sorry sorry, i´m trying to be civil, i guess i took on the "cinical" approach too hard, i apologize

I´m a furry after all, and all this touches very sensitive spots :3

I understand that entirely, but the way arguments and misconceptions are sorted out civilly is by everyone being objective about everything and not letting personal feelings enter into it.
If I let personal feelings enter into it everytime someone mistakenly called me a "shemale" well... let's just say there'd be alot of people in the hospital ^^
-Tabs<3-

 

[The Lunatic]

Unfortunate quote if you're in the 'furries aren't into bestiality' camp I'm afraid Cingal... The ancient egyptians were into all kinds of bestiality and apparently 'mastered the art of coitus with a crocodile'.

I'm just sayin'.

It's not Egyptian.

It's "The Lion man of the Hohlenstein Stadel" it is dated at being over 32,000 years old and is believe to be the oldest known depiction of an anthropomorphic creature.

The point was, "Humanity's interest has been around for a long time.".

 

[Gigano]

Didn't really know what the definition of a furry was, but I see nothing wrong with a person harbouring a sexual attraction to either anthropomorphic or actual animals, as long as it's not acted upon neither cause any discernible harm in the physical world.

Of course, whereas the fantasies of a furry can never actually[footnote]I suppose they could somehow be simulated, but as long as it's with consenting persons of legal age and mental maturity, there's nothing controversial there either.[/footnote] be acted upon in the real world - anthropomorphs being notoriously hard to come by - bestiality can, and then it certainly becomes potentially harmful (in the sense of causing an animal distress and/or pain), making the latter concept somewhat less innocent (if not as much as those sexualities which are inherently harmful when acted upon). So I can understand a wish to differentiate oneself from it.

 

[Daedalus1942]

Didn't really know what the definition of a furry was, but I see nothing with a person harbouring a sexual attraction to either anthropomorphic or actual animals, as long as it's not acted upon neither cause any discernible harm in the physical world.

Of course, whereas the fantasies of a furry can never actually[footnote]I suppose they could somehow be simulated, but as long as it's with consenting persons of legal age and mental maturity, there's nothing controversial there either.[/footnote] be acted upon in the real world - anthropomorphs being notoriously hard to come by - bestiality can, and then it certainly becomes potentially harmful (in the sense of causing an animal distress and/or pain), making the latter concept somewhat less innocent (if not as much as those sexualities which are inherently harmful when acted upon). So I can understand a wish to differentiate oneself from it.

That is also ONE of the functions and ideas behind the fursuit. Not always, but there are some people who do enjoy wearing suits to have sex. Nothing wrong with that, imho.
-Tabs<3-

 

[HentMas]

Didn't really know what the definition of a furry was, but I see nothing with a person harbouring a sexual attraction to either anthropomorphic or actual animals, as long as it's not acted upon neither cause any discernible harm in the physical world.

Of course, whereas the fantasies of a furry can never actually[footnote]I suppose they could somehow be simulated, but as long as it's with consenting persons of legal age and mental maturity, there's nothing controversial there either.[/footnote] be acted upon in the real world - anthropomorphs being notoriously hard to come by - bestiality can, and then it certainly becomes potentially harmful (in the sense of causing an animal distress and/or pain), making the latter concept somewhat less innocent (if not as much as those sexualities which are inherently harmful when acted upon). So I can understand a wish to differentiate oneself from it.

o hai there, you seem like an interesting person!, i like you a lot!, and you said all that in such a timely and beautifull manner

thank you for existing!!!

 

[Dystopia]

I studied anthropology at university; I have a degree in it.

It is horrifying to me that people are using it to describe their bestiality interests.

Let's get this little misunderstanding straight. When we say "anthro" we mean anthropomorphic. Not Anthropology. With the former being the 'humanisation' of something (don't argue semantics, there's no point) and the second being the study of humans and humankind.

We do not use your precious word, we use a similar yet different one.

Actually it means 'man' or 'human', not 'humanisation'. Don't argue semantics (with an anthropologist), there's no point.

Also, someone used the word anthropology in the other bestiality thread. I don't want my science being used as a term relating to it, that's all.

 

[Chairman Miaow]

At no point id I say furries liked animals, in fact that is the opposite of what I was saying. I was just saying that it couldn't really be used as an argument, as it was all speculation.

Hentmas. Try to be civil.

Daedalus. Thank you for being civil.

sorry sorry, i´m trying to be civil, i guess i took on the "cinical" approach too hard, i apologize

I´m a furry after all, and all this touches very sensitive spots :3

EDIT: and i was trying to quote someone else, not you! hahahaha

Well I'm sorry, I was being really sarcastic for no good reason, and I can understand how after all the crap some people give furries it must be really irritating. I'm sorry.