Furry != Bestiality
- Thread starter TimeLord
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Aaaaaaand we have a winner!!!!!!Dana22 said:Type in "Furry" in Google graphics search. Turn off filters. Browse. See two dogs in nazi uniforms with one giving a blowjob to the other. Yeah it isn't.TimeLord said:
Not really. I have the Escapist in the background. I flick between interesting-looking discussion topics that show up in that little sidebar on the right. I'm usually doing a few other things at the same time. I know for a fact that I'll be uncertain about watching a ten-minute video during an argument, never mind one approaching forty. So please, drop the assumption that people on the Escapist are just the people with nothing better to do. It's not a nice thing to say.Zeeky_Santos said:
TimeLord, no offence to him, feeling the need to refer his opponent to somebody else is pure laziness. Perhaps he felt he couldn't argue it himself, and that the person in the video could, but to call Rednog lazy for not wanting to give up thirty-seven minutes of his day to hear an argument that he could have read in two minutes is preposterous. If Rednog's lazy, TimeLord keeps a beer-cannon next to his bed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Eb2zI2kOLU xD.Casual Shinji said:This thread is getting way too hairy for me
I watched that video that was linked.
After coming to the end of it, I feel while it was interesting to see the community, that it was somewhat unfinished and biased. They mentioned "the bad furries", those that make the world think you're all into nothing but having sex in fursuits, but they didnt try talk to those people. I find the most interesting documentaries are of those people and making a comparison between the good and the bad.
After coming to the end of it, I feel while it was interesting to see the community, that it was somewhat unfinished and biased. They mentioned "the bad furries", those that make the world think you're all into nothing but having sex in fursuits, but they didnt try talk to those people. I find the most interesting documentaries are of those people and making a comparison between the good and the bad.
A furry is sexually attracted to something that is clearly not human. It may have human characteristics, but no human has a tail, cat ears, or fur. The question then is it considered "Beast"iality because a furry image is fictional and in reality impossible (except for costumes), and it can be argued that the creatures are more human than not.
I personally consider it bestiality because it is very tough to draw a line between what is "furry" and what is an animal. That is not to say I think furries like going up to the farm to make friends with their goats.
I personally consider it bestiality because it is very tough to draw a line between what is "furry" and what is an animal. That is not to say I think furries like going up to the farm to make friends with their goats.
My argument's with you, not with TimeLord. TimeLord showed the video. Rednog rejected it. You stuck your oar in, now I'm hitting you with it.Zeeky_Santos said:
Now I could have it on in the background, while doing other things, but then it becomes background noise that nobody takes in. If TimeLord really needed to use the man's words, why not quote him directly? What's wrong with him putting the effort into furthering his own argument? Your example of Star Wars is completely out of place. That's a film designed to entertain through its writing, story and visual effects. This is an argument with straight, pure and simple facts being presented.
And as for game developers' news...well, I rely on the Escapist for gaming news. Everything I hear about the gaming industry comes from here, not directly from the source. TimeLord isn't trying to say that this man's views are important because it's this man. It's not like he's trying to say Stephen Hawking did some analysis on the subject, and proved it to be TimeLord's argument.
Only then would I want to see evidence that it was indeed the scientist that said it. The subject of the video and the argument is the message the man had, not the identity.
Forgive me for this, but to be completely honest, if a guy thinks furries are into bestiality, a documentary where furries tell him they aren't into bestiality is going to have no effect at all. If a man has a deep seated hatred of homosexuals, no amount of them will ever persuade him that it's okay to be gay. If TimeLord couldn't persuade Rednog on his own, then I'm sorry, but the viewpoints of a billion furries won't have any effect either.Zeeky_Santos said:
People have always had, and will always have, conservative attitudes towards sex. The discrimination towards furries is nothing new, look at the acceptable discrimination towards BDSM. People see the iconography of torture (or in the furry case, animals) and they relate it to the standard concept that they are aware of (torture, and bestiality in these cases).
This can change depending on who you are, for example, in the past feminists have seen dominant sex play with submissive women, as a symbol of a patriarchal world, when it is in fact far from it. People see others dressed like animals, sexualising animals, and having sex with other people that look like animals, guess what they're going to relate it to. The video that was posted had someone who had taken their dog to the convention, which gives rise to this complete conflict of emotion for people who would watch that. Of course people are going to wonder if a group of "furrys" who find animal-dressed people attractive, would actually take it to the next step with the dog that's already there. Ignorance breeds, and conclusions can be made out of anything when the original thought had no basis in truth or fact, or was made up of presumption.
You guys can argue all you want that "furrys" aren't about sex, but since when have people ever researched things that they don't approve of? An example would be the American hatred of communism. How many Americans have ever fully researched and read up on communism, read Marx and Orwell. How many would go out of their way to do so? Yet how many believe that communism is bad? Quite a lot Sure that has a lot to do with propaganda, but all politics and media IS propaganda of a more casual nature.
Most people believe what they read in the easy to swallow media, and form an opinion, and you guys are no different. Don't get offended when your niche hobby gets lost in translation to a general public, who by and large aren't actually protesting what you do. They may not like it, or see the attraction, but at least they aren't trying to ban you from doing it.
This can change depending on who you are, for example, in the past feminists have seen dominant sex play with submissive women, as a symbol of a patriarchal world, when it is in fact far from it. People see others dressed like animals, sexualising animals, and having sex with other people that look like animals, guess what they're going to relate it to. The video that was posted had someone who had taken their dog to the convention, which gives rise to this complete conflict of emotion for people who would watch that. Of course people are going to wonder if a group of "furrys" who find animal-dressed people attractive, would actually take it to the next step with the dog that's already there. Ignorance breeds, and conclusions can be made out of anything when the original thought had no basis in truth or fact, or was made up of presumption.
You guys can argue all you want that "furrys" aren't about sex, but since when have people ever researched things that they don't approve of? An example would be the American hatred of communism. How many Americans have ever fully researched and read up on communism, read Marx and Orwell. How many would go out of their way to do so? Yet how many believe that communism is bad? Quite a lot Sure that has a lot to do with propaganda, but all politics and media IS propaganda of a more casual nature.
Most people believe what they read in the easy to swallow media, and form an opinion, and you guys are no different. Don't get offended when your niche hobby gets lost in translation to a general public, who by and large aren't actually protesting what you do. They may not like it, or see the attraction, but at least they aren't trying to ban you from doing it.
