RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,318
Posts: 5,352,420
Members: 24,622
Currently online: 591
Newest member: groucho900

TrekToday headlines

Drexler TV Alert
By: T'Bonz on Jul 26

Retro Review: His Way
By: Michelle on Jul 26

MicroWarriors Releases Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Ships Of The Line Design Contest
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Next Weekend: Shore Leave 36!
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

True Trek History To Be Penned
By: T'Bonz on Jul 25

Insight Editions Announces Three Trek Books For 2015
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

To Be Takei Review by Spencer Blohm
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Mulgrew: Playing Red
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24

Hallmark 2015 Trek Ornaments
By: T'Bonz on Jul 24


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Lounges & General Chat > Miscellaneous

Miscellaneous Discussion of non-Trek topics.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old October 7 2009, 02:51 AM   #16
thestrangequark
Vice Admiral
 
thestrangequark's Avatar
 
Location: thestrangequark
Re: Furries

In regards to Furries in relation to art, it's clearly very normal. Anthropomorphizing animals seems to go as far back in human history as the ability to identify oneself as human. It's ancient and ubiquitous in pretty much every culture I know -- sometimes as part of religion, entertainment, whatever. The fact that there is a subculture who identify themselves by their appreciation for the art and literature surrounding anthropomorphized animals isn't so odd. We're inundated with such images from the moment we're born, what with 50% of children's entertainment populated by animals in people's clothing.

The fact that for some people this appreciation has grown to fascination and the fascination to fetishism isn't really surprising either; we grow up with characters we idolize and identify with who are anthropomorphized animals (Disney, Loony Toons, Dangermouse is a personal fave). For many people the things that are most comforting and pleasurable in childhood continue to be so in adulthood, and may develop sexual connections. I haven't studied the subject, but I doubt that most furries are into bestiality at all. They're into something very specific, and it's not sheep and dogs, it's fantastical characters that have some animal qualities.

As for my gut reaction to furries and sex, though -- honestly, and hoping not to offend, I think they're indulging in one of the most humorous sexual fetishes in existence. I don't want to be the type to mock other people their quirks and more unusual proclivities, but the idea of furries -- informed by people in what amount to high school mascot costumes miming the deed, and bewiskered and tailed pin-up girls -- are just, well, funny. Really, really funny. But then, I find most fetishes funny (with the obvious exception of the disturbed). Hell, I find my own fetishes funny. People are strange, especially when it comes to sex, and I think furries add a delightfully imaginative strangeness to the annals of bizarre human sexual behavior.

Also, while I don't share the Furry fetish (well, Disney's Robin Hood was sexy, but he was sexy despite being an anthropomorphized cartoon fox, not because of it), I bet I could draw some Furry characters that are way hotter than the random stuff I've come across. Maybe I could take commissions and sell pictures.
__________________
The Enterprise is my TARDIS.

View my art!
thestrangequark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2009, 02:51 AM   #17
J. Allen
Best Pony™
 
J. Allen's Avatar
 
Location: United States
Send a message via ICQ to J. Allen Send a message via AIM to J. Allen Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to J. Allen Send a message via Yahoo to J. Allen
Re: Furries

NCC-1701 wrote: View Post
I'm not much into furry characters myself, but I have some friends who are and I never thought of it as particularly odd or strange. As J. has pointed out before, a Star Trek message board should be the last of all places where furry fandom is looked down upon.

I do, however, have a problem with some of the art depicting furry characters. Not because I consider it obscene, but rather because most of it looks just the same! I mean, from a purely artistic standpoint; why do so many 'artists' draw their characters in exactly the same unoriginal way? And I'm thinking mostly of all the furries on deviantArt. It's as if they are just copying one another.

You and I have that same question. For me, the whole point of the art is variety. When people emulate the same style, it loses it's charm, it's fantasy.

J.
__________________
:: :: ::
Visit Brony Kingdom! Don't ask why, just do it.
:: :: ::
-=- I still wish upon stars -=-
J. Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2009, 02:54 AM   #18
J. Allen
Best Pony™
 
J. Allen's Avatar
 
Location: United States
Send a message via ICQ to J. Allen Send a message via AIM to J. Allen Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to J. Allen Send a message via Yahoo to J. Allen
Re: Furries

thestrangledcorpse wrote: View Post
In regards to Furries in relation to art, it's clearly very normal. Anthropomorphizing animals seems to go as far back in human history as the ability to identify oneself as human. It's ancient and ubiquitous in pretty much every culture I know -- sometimes as part of religion, entertainment, whatever. The fact that there is a subculture who identify themselves by their appreciation for the art and literature surrounding anthropomorphized animals isn't so odd. We're inundated with such images from the moment we're born, what with 50% of children's entertainment populated by animals in people's clothing.

The fact that for some people this appreciation has grown to fascination and the fascination to fetishism isn't really surprising either; we grow up with characters we idolize and identify with who anthropomorphized animals (Disney, Loony Toons, Dangermouse is a personal fave). For many people the things that are most comforting and pleasurable in childhood continue to be so in adulthood, and may develop sexual connections. I haven't studied the subject, but I doubt that most furries are into bestiality at all. They're into something very specific, and it's not sheep and dogs, it's fantastical characters that have some animal qualities.

As for my gut reaction to furries and sex, though -- honestly, and hoping not to offend, I think they're indulging in one of the most humorous sexual fetishes in existence. I don't want to be the type to mock other people their quirks and more unusual proclivities, but the idea of furries -- informed by people in what amount to high school mascot costumes miming the deed, and bewiskered and tailed pin-up girls -- are just, well, funny. Really, really funny. But then, I find most fetishes funny (with the obvious exception of the disturbed). Hell, I find my own fetishes funny. People are strange, especially when it comes to sex, and I think furries add a delightfully imaginative strangeness to the annals of bizarre human sexual behavior.

Also, while I don't share the Furry fetish (well, Disney's Robin Hood was sexy, but he was sexy despite being an anthropomorphized cartoon fox, not because of it), I bet I could draw some Furry characters that are way hotter than the random stuff I've come across. Maybe I could take commissions and sell pictures.
Honestly, commissioned artwork is something you should look into. I have seen some incredible artwork, but as I was saying to NCC and he to me, much of the artwork is the same, it's emulated and after a while gets repetitive. I am learning to draw so I can make my own, and make it as imaginative as possible.

For the record, I too grew up with some Disney favorites. Primarily Rescue Rangers, Tailspin, and not once did I ever sexualize any of it.

Oh, and don't worry, you haven't offended. I started this thread to clear the air.

J.
__________________
:: :: ::
Visit Brony Kingdom! Don't ask why, just do it.
:: :: ::
-=- I still wish upon stars -=-
J. Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2009, 02:56 AM   #19
melancholymecha
Rear Admiral
 
melancholymecha's Avatar
 
Re: Furries

I dont mind it, Im a hybrid(mermen, centaurs, etc) nut myself. Also werewolves & humans when they have a few animal characteristics(like in mid transformation), though for some reason once they have a fully snouted animal head like say Anubis, Im no longer interested...
melancholymecha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2009, 02:58 AM   #20
Gep Malakai
Vice Admiral
 
Gep Malakai's Avatar
 
Send a message via AIM to Gep Malakai Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Gep Malakai
Re: Furries

TheGallifreyanSith wrote: View Post
Considering some of the freaky stuff I've read/heard about in SW fandom (Jabba / Han Solo rape slash...I kid you not) most fandoms have me saying "Okay, and you're into fucking what?"
That's a very good point, and one that brings me to something I meant to say here:


Jay O'Lantern wrote: View Post
Where did you acquire that information? What sources? There is far more to furry fandom than sexuality. In fact, being a furry is easy; all you have to do is express an interest in anthropomorphic animals or animals with human sentience. For example; Mickey mouse, Bugs Bunny, Sonic the Hedgehog.

What popularized the idea of furries and sex has much to do with a particular episode of CSI called "Fur and Loathing in Las Vegas". Like all such shows, things like that need to be taken with a huge grain of salt. They're not out for truth, they're out for ratings and controversy.
While it's nice (and sort of true) to pin the blame for this on media who spin it for sensationalism, I feel there's a lot of self-reflection the fandom needs to do about not only how it's presenting itself but what it actually does. Go to any furry art site, turn any filters off, and look at the uploads. It's full of porn and nudity. I don't know how accurate it is to paint fandom as sexual, but given the content, we're kind of asking for it; while it's not the full story, it's not wrong, either.

The furry fandom is like the slashfic, Kirk/Spock seedy underbelly of the Trek fandom, but without the normalizing influence of a vanilla mainstream media product as its tentpole. We're the only self-generating fandom built around an idea rather than a product or media empire that I'm aware of, making little difference between user content and
"official" product. That has it positives and it's negatives, but one of the big negatives is really freaky art. As a result, we have the odd situation of the "Jabba/Han" slash equivalent being just as mainstream an legitimate as the clean stuff.

Now, is that bad? My hard drive is hardly a posterchild for the It's Not a Sexual Fetish Honest camp anyway, so I'm in no position to judge, but given not just what's presented but what we actually put on the Internet...I'm not so ready anymore to leap to defend the fandom as a monolithic entity to those who look at it and are squicked out. I actually called into Anthropodcast last week about this very subject, and brought up some of my observations form the TrekBBS; the new show isn't up yet however, so no idea if they used my voicemail or not.

Jay O'Lantern wrote: View Post
Bestiality? In what way? We're animals ourselves. We're a part of the species homo sapiens and are simply bipedal primates. What you're thinking of is an attraction to feral animals. Keep in mind, that (and I've said this before) we're on a Star Trek board where people have expressed interest in having sex with green skinned Orions, Klingons, Vulcans, Romulans, Trills, Andorians, and all manner of species. It has been said that "yes, but these are people in makeup", and so I say anthropomorphic animals are merely people in fur/feathers/scales. The sentience is there, unlike in bestiality where the animals is feral and non-sentient/self aware.

J.
The self-aware part is important to note, but--and again, I hate to say this--bestiality does happen, albeit not at a *too* much higher rate than the general population, if the discussions about this on the FurAffinity forums are to be believed. I spent the last several minutes digging unsuccessfully through the FA forums to try to find a post where one guy talked about notcing a percentage if folks who come to conventions bringing their pets with them, and that those pets are almost always "unaltered," shall we say. As he put it, "you don't have to be a neurosurgeon to figure out what's going on here."

On the flip side, (and, again, I wish I could locate this post and link to it), it was brough up there that most furries really seem to have a thing for "kyewt" ears and tails, rather than animals for real, as we all grew up watching tlaking cartoon animals as kids and probably imprinted on them to some extent. (I think that's true in my case, at any rate.)
__________________
"From the darkness you must fall, failed and weak, to darkness all."
-Kataris
Gep Malakai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2009, 02:59 AM   #21
Robert Maxwell
Respect the Beef
 
Robert Maxwell's Avatar
 
Location: Right behind you!
View Robert Maxwell's Twitter Profile Send a message via ICQ to Robert Maxwell Send a message via AIM to Robert Maxwell Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Robert Maxwell Send a message via Yahoo to Robert Maxwell
Re: Furries

Jay O'Lantern wrote: View Post
The Dead Nations wrote: View Post
No, sorry, a lot of us watched that stuff as kids, and we wouldn't identify as furries. Because the entire point of the furry subculture is fetishizing anthropomorphic animals.
No, it's not.
A furry is someone who expresses an interest in anthropomorphic or sentient animals, most commonly found in art, literature and media.
Dolphins are sentient, and I think if you called a cetacean scientist a "furry" you'd get punched in the mouth. People who watch cartoons with animals in them are not furries and would not identify as such, for the most part. Whether you like it or not, the term "furry" refers almost exclusively to anthropomorphic animal fetishism.

Why do your avatars and wallpapers have female animals in provocative poses? And then you claim it's not strictly sexual.
So if you saw someone with Princess Leia in a bikini, you're going to assume all Star Wars fandom is about sexuality? My avatars have that because I like the images. I like the colors. Do I find sexuality in it? Sure, if I want. I like Fantasy.
Princess Leia is human. And yes, actually, sex appeal is definitely part of Star Wars, and no one has denied that. What are you doing here is trying to deny the overtly sexual nature of the furry-related items you post.


Then where did you get your information on furry fandom?
The Internet, man. They're all over. Always whining about being persecuted, and having to be banned from forums where they aren't wanted because they either won't stop posting furry bullshit or they're always whining about how no one will accept them.

So, people who like looking at animals in provocative poses aren't actually turned on by it at all? Is that what you're saying?

I'm sure people read lolicon for the stories, too.
No need to get acidic. I will gladly answer questions, it's why I started the thread. Firstly, most furry art is not sexual in any way. Secondly, what is sexual is usually niche, just as other more accepted porn is niche. There are people in both groups.
No, what I see here is you trying to normalize the furry subculture by claiming anyone who likes cartoon animals is actually a furry. You might as well claim any guy who likes masturbating is gay, because he likes touching dicks.

I really don't care what sorts of creepy things furries are into, I am just against this whole "acceptance" movement. So some people don't like your subculture, so what? There are things I like that nobody else does, and I don't go waging propaganda campaigns so people will accept it. Why are furries so obsessed with being accepted? Is it because they don't want to admit what they're into is weird and deviant?

Don't be dense, J. Yes, we're animals. But we're humans. Humans don't go having sex with non-humans. Even in Star Trek, I find the concept kind of icky, but let's face it--the aliens in Star Trek are, by and large, a lot closer to being human than your typical furry character. A bumpy forehead isn't really that "alien." Having a dog snout, furry body, and tail? Yeah, I think you're venturing into "I have dirty thoughts about animals" territory.
I'm not being dense. I'm being honest, completely honest. A character may have a dog snought, furry body and tail, but that doesn't mean I'm going to have sexual thoughts about my neighbor's Border collie. There is a huge difference in those concepts, and it's intellectually disingenuous to push them together and assume they represent furries as a whole.

J.
Okay, fine, then you're having sexual thoughts about something that isn't human and doesn't even pretend to be done, or pass as one. I think that's kinda creepy. Your mileage may vary. I don't see why it makes any difference to you what anyone else thinks of it, though.
__________________
"Holy shit! It's Beef Supreme!"
The Journeyman - Buy it now! Maybe?
My world simulation project!
My blog
Robert Maxwell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2009, 03:00 AM   #22
Gep Malakai
Vice Admiral
 
Gep Malakai's Avatar
 
Send a message via AIM to Gep Malakai Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Gep Malakai
Re: Furries

Starbreaker wrote: View Post
Do you like to dress up in animal costumes and have sex with other people in animal costumes?
This woman does. (Link has NSFW image near the bottom of the page, by the way.) Cue Internet drama...
__________________
"From the darkness you must fall, failed and weak, to darkness all."
-Kataris
Gep Malakai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2009, 03:02 AM   #23
Gep Malakai
Vice Admiral
 
Gep Malakai's Avatar
 
Send a message via AIM to Gep Malakai Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to Gep Malakai
Re: Furries

Jay O'Lantern wrote: View Post
Whether you like it or not, the term "furry" refers almost exclusively to anthropomorphic animal fetishism.
Strictly speaking, at least in the original definition of the term, Jay is correct. It has evolved and narrowed since the early '90s, however, in response to exactly the kind of thing you're talking about. That said, the definition is still broader than you're giving it credit for, as "furry" tends to encompass all kinds of online artists and convention-goers, whether they have a sexual fetish for the art or not. (See marymouse, sammystudio, dingbat, frisket, thornwolf etc.)




Jay O'Lantern wrote: View Post
For the record, I too grew up with some Disney favorites. Primarily Rescue Rangers, Tailspin, and not once did I ever sexualize any of it.
Oh, I don't know, Gadget was kind of hot. Not that I noticed as a kid, of course.
__________________
"From the darkness you must fall, failed and weak, to darkness all."
-Kataris
Gep Malakai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2009, 03:12 AM   #24
J. Allen
Best Pony™
 
J. Allen's Avatar
 
Location: United States
Send a message via ICQ to J. Allen Send a message via AIM to J. Allen Send a message via Windows Live Messenger to J. Allen Send a message via Yahoo to J. Allen
Re: Furries

Ghoul Malakai wrote: View Post
**snip excellent post**
I understand what you're saying, and usually I relegate such things to the same type of fandom that I do Star Trek fans who go for the whole K/S fiction as you mentioned before. There will always be that kind of subculture, there's no denying that. All we can do is show that there is a balance to it, just like there are Star Trek fans who just enjoy watching the show.

The Dead Nations wrote: View Post
Dolphins are sentient, and I think if you called a cetacean scientist a "furry" you'd get punched in the mouth. People who watch cartoons with animals in them are not furries and would not identify as such, for the most part. Whether you like it or not, the term "furry" refers almost exclusively to anthropomorphic animal fetishism.
It doesn't. The popular culture currently replaces "furry" with "guy who wants to have sex with cats", just as it replaces "Trekkie" with "guy who lives in basement playing with action figures and will never get laid". If we based ourselves on popular culture definitions, then there would be no point in trying to explain to others the misconceptions.

Princess Leia is human. And yes, actually, sex appeal is definitely part of Star Wars, and no one has denied that. What are you doing here is trying to deny the overtly sexual nature of the furry-related items you post.
No, I readily state that many of the images I post have a sexual tone in them. I have never denied that. In fact, my signature even has such a tone in it. Why would I deny this?

The Internet, man. They're all over. Always whining about being persecuted, and having to be banned from forums where they aren't wanted because they either won't stop posting furry bullshit or they're always whining about how no one will accept them.
I'm not whining about being persecuted. Whether I am accepted or not is not up to me. All I can do is be who I am and trust that people will eventually get the idea that I'm not some kind of sexual predator or guy who wants to have sex with Flipper.

No, what I see here is you trying to normalize the furry subculture by claiming anyone who likes cartoon animals is actually a furry. You might as well claim any guy who likes masturbating is gay, because he likes touching dicks.
I see here that you're not listening to anything I say, instead substituting what you believe is furry fandom, even when a furry is trying to tell you all about it. Again, I ask, what are your sources? I honestly want to know.

I really don't care what sorts of creepy things furries are into, I am just against this whole "acceptance" movement. So some people don't like your subculture, so what? There are things I like that nobody else does, and I don't go waging propaganda campaigns so people will accept it. Why are furries so obsessed with being accepted? Is it because they don't want to admit what they're into is weird and deviant?
You're not making a good argument here, you're ranting more than anything. Relax. I'm not out to make you into a furry. It's not a disease and you can't catch it just by associating with furries.


Okay, fine, then you're having sexual thoughts about something that isn't human and doesn't even pretend to be done, or pass as one. I think that's kinda creepy. Your mileage may vary. I don't see why it makes any difference to you what anyone else thinks of it, though.
I bolded the part where it shows everything you've ignored up to this point about me and what I have said. If you have issues with it, fine, but at the very least, address what I have actually said.

As for what difference it makes, it doesn't. I'm just curious. There's nothing wrong with that. If we never ask questions, what's the point of learning anything?

Anyhoo, in a more general remark to everyone, here is an example of furry art that I like:

(Copyright 2009 Valentine Crow, just so I can get the legalities out of the way)


J.
__________________
:: :: ::
Visit Brony Kingdom! Don't ask why, just do it.
:: :: ::
-=- I still wish upon stars -=-
J. Allen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2009, 03:27 AM   #25
Yoda
Rear Admiral
 
Yoda's Avatar
 
Location: San Diego
Re: Furries

Here's what I think about furries: You're a bunch of weirdos.

I don't buy that the 'sexual' side of it is overstated. I assume that you *fap* to it. But even if you didn't, instead of being mildly disturbed by the concept, I'd still think being a furry is a bit silly and lame.

I didn't see any CSI episode about it, it's largely based on what I've seen on the Internet without actually looking for it.

This 'other cultures' use anthropomorphism crap doesn't jive with me either. When I've seen that kind of stuff it's usually in some sort of mythological context. That's a little different than a ripoff Disney-style fox... with tits.

I don't feel bad about my stereotyping. When the Comic Con folk roll into town every year they're basically a parade of ridiculous stereotypes.
__________________
Yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2009, 03:28 AM   #26
sidious618
Admiral
 
sidious618's Avatar
 
Location: New York, US
Send a message via AIM to sidious618
Re: Furries

Furry fandom, or whatever you want to call it, is usually defined more by the sexual images.

First, though, I'll hit the non-sexualized images. I don't care if you like them, it's not different than liking any picture.

Sexualized animal pictures is, to me, completely bizarre and borderline deviant. If you're into that, fine, but it's not exactly normal to find other animals arousing just because you throw a pair of breats on them. And, no, comparing it to a Twi'lek or a Klingon doesn't standup. For one thing, Klingons and Twi'leks are not real AND they're played by regular ol' human beings. You're objectifying animals and making them into sex objects.

Now, letme put it another way: WHY? Why would you want to make animals sexually charged? Is it some sort of artistic statment? What's the appeal if it's not sexual?
__________________
We've met before, haven't we?
sidious618 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2009, 03:36 AM   #27
M
Vice Admiral
 
M's Avatar
 
Re: Furries

Oh boy ... I must say, I'm somewhat surprised at the lack of understanding with which furry fandom is met here. I guess I expected Trek fans to be a little more open-minded ...
__________________
Bashir: »Out of all the stories you told me, which ones were true and which ones weren't?«
Garak: »My dear doctor, they're all true.«
Bashir: »Even the lies?«
Garak: »Especially the lies.«
M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2009, 03:39 AM   #28
trampledamage
Clone
 
trampledamage's Avatar
 
Location: hitching a ride to Erebor
Re: Furries

I'm just surprised the thread's lasted this long without reference to M'Ress.
__________________
Space is disease and danger wrapped in darkness and silence - Dr. McCoy

And he says that like it's a bad thing...
trampledamage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2009, 03:40 AM   #29
Rii
Rear Admiral
 
Location: Adelaide
Re: Furries

NCC-1701 wrote: View Post
Oh boy ... I must say, I'm somewhat surprised at the lack of understanding with which furry fandom is met here. I guess I expected Trek fans to be a little more open-minded ...
Clearly you're unfamiliar with the geek hierarchy:

Rii is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 7 2009, 03:40 AM   #30
M
Vice Admiral
 
M's Avatar
 
Re: Furries

Elephants Graveyard wrote: View Post
I'm just surprised the thread's lasted this long without reference to M'Ress.
Yeah, where's Redfern when you need him?
__________________
Bashir: »Out of all the stories you told me, which ones were true and which ones weren't?«
Garak: »My dear doctor, they're all true.«
Bashir: »Even the lies?«
Garak: »Especially the lies.«
M is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
animation, art, furcon, furry, furry strip poker league, fursona, hairballs, robau brand products, sexual perversion

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:40 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.