Just for laughs, here are a couple of comic strips...
http://www.pvponline.com/2002/09/30/
http://www.pvponline.com/2002/10/
http://www.pvponline.com/2002/09/30/
http://www.pvponline.com/2002/10/
I skipped over this part before, but I agree with Jay that you should give it a shot. Based on your work illustrating Jayson's posts, I'd be interested to see what you could come up with. The furry fandom, by the way, is populated by many young people with a lot of disposable income and/or no financial sense, so it is possible to make a lot of money selling furry art.
(I've given some thought myself to filling the regrettable lack of good or even decent CGI artwork in the furry community, but have yet to find the motivation to work on anything.)
OK, here's my 0.02c.
I'm a furry. I identify with a particular kind of animal, and I appreciate the mythology surrounding that kind of animal.
The furry fandem's primary focus is sex. Sorry to the furry believers here to the contrary, but I wish it were otherwise. There is a reason why it's stuffed full of 75% Gay and Bisexual men. However, there _is_ an appreciation of the idea of anthropomorphism, it's just lost against the backdrop of sex a lot of the time.
Are they furries because of sex? No. Do they have sex because they're furries? I'd say so, in a lot of cases, for whatever brain switches that are or are not on.
Do I find the artwork sexually arousing? Yes. Do I find fursuit sex arousing? Rarely. Also, while a lot of furries have different, and diverse sexual perversions, they are no more prevalent than among regular people.
I'm a furry. I identify with a particular kind of animal, and I appreciate the mythology surrounding that kind of animal.
The furry fandem's primary focus is sex. Sorry to the furry believers here to the contrary, but I wish it were otherwise. There is a reason why it's stuffed full of 75% Gay and Bisexual men. However, there _is_ an appreciation of the idea of anthropomorphism, it's just lost against the backdrop of sex a lot of the time.
Are they furries because of sex? No. Do they have sex because they're furries? I'd say so, in a lot of cases, for whatever brain switches that are or are not on.
Do I find the artwork sexually arousing? Yes. Do I find fursuit sex arousing? Rarely. Also, while a lot of furries have different, and diverse sexual perversions, they are no more prevalent than among regular people.
Come on. Let's say you were a rabid XBox 360 fan, and I hated XBox 360 and loved PS3. Couldn't we just get along? This thread just goes to show how much intolerance there is in this world, and we ain't even talking about sexual orientation, religion, or any of that good stuff.
Ah, here we go, now it's "intolerance."
No. I don't care if you're a furry. I don't care if J is a furry. I don't care if this entire board is populated by closeted furries. What I do care about is not having the place crapped up with furry nonsense. J's been on a furry kick lately, posting wallpapers, showing us his own art, and then starting a thread like this. Taken individually, none of those things are all that bothersome, but as a whole, I get the impression it's J saying "I'm a furry! Look at me! Look how alt I am!"
J, if all you did was post "anthro art" with no suggestive themes, nobody would bat an eye. They might think it's kinda odd, but I doubt anyone would say anything. Instead, you post wallpapers with foxes in bikinis (overtly sexual) and have an avatar with a naked, anthropormophic animal pressing her tits against a pumpkin. Come on, J, you're as much a horndog as anyone, you know how suggestive that stuff is. I even recall you getting dressed down by a mod once because you went a bit over the line with one of your furry wallpapers (can't find the link, sorry, just from memory.)
Basically, I think you set the tone for this in the first place, by pushing the sexual stuff, and then you backtracked and said "no, no, furry art isn't just sexual!"
Honestly, it's the same thing I've heard from other furries. Most people who just like art depicting animals do not identify as "furries." That moniker tends to be self-assumed by people who are into the sexual aspect of it. I don't even mean the yiffing and the fursuits, just looking at an anthro fox and thinking "that's hot, I'll fap to that."
There are a few here who claim to be furries while being a bit creeped out by the sexual part of it, and I notice they even admit those people do a lot of damage to the public perception of furries.
So, ya know what, I don't really care what gets your rocks off. If you want to post art as art for us to appreciate, fine, do it. Some people won't get it, some people will like it. You won't find me having a go at you for posting non-sexual anthro art.
You post anthro animals in provocative positions, scantily clad, with human sexual characteristics, guess what? Some people aren't gonna be cool with that. Some of us find it creepy and deviant. You're entitled to like what you like, but don't get upset when you ask what people think and then they come tell you they think it's creepy.
Don't ask if you don't want to know the answer.
A
Amaris
Guest
I can respect that, even though I stand by the notion that the primary focus is not sex. However, since that is more prevalent on the internet, I can easily see how it could be so, or at least seen that way, because it is all over the place.
Does that mean everyone here who is a Star Trek fan has a Star Trek avatar for the sole purpose of saying "I'm a Trekkie! Look at me! Look how alt I am!"? Does it mean everyone who is a fan and has an av of "Doctor Who" is saying the same thing? What about video games? Religions?
Why is it that if I post an avatar it's nonsense? Would you prefer I keep my enjoyment of anthro art to myself so that it doesn't bother you? Think about what you're saying.
It wasn't a furry wallpaper, she was very much human, and the mod was SPOCKED, who felt it stepped over the line. I will agree to your idea to post vanilla images if everyone else agrees not to post anything remotely sexual in any way on this board, and that includes the Genre Babe and Genre Hunk threads, in which a large number of people post. I post it because I like it, not because others don't. If we followed that rule, no one would have a contrary opinion about anything because it would upset everyone else who didn't hold the same opinion. What I post is completely harmless.
Who pushed the sexual aspect of it? This was my initial post:
Jay O'Lantern said:
There is nothing sexually suggestive here at all. I think you are mistaken.
No, it is simply that many people assume the term "furries" means "Someone who wants to have sex with people in fursuits", which is incorrect. I am making no assumptions here. I'm correcting them, which is why I started the thread.
Because they do, just like the people who are into K/S slash and wear their Starfleet uniforms to court dates do the same for Trek fandom, just as other hardcore fans do for other fandoms. In that aspect, being a furry is not unique.
I asked because I wanted to know the answer. I wanted to clear up assumptions and misconceptions. I still do, and I'm still answering questions as people ask them. What is not being done, here? It doesn't matter to me if you don't like furry fandom or anthro art that has a sexual nature to it. That doesn't bother me one bit, to each their own, but I do care to correct the notion that furries are, by association, into bestiality and pedophilia, and I have the right to do so.
J.
Well, actually, yeah, that is generally what someone is announcing when they choose an avatar. It's a way of expressing yourself. Currently, you are expressing yourself as someone who likes sexualized animal drawings.
I don't have a problem with anthro art, just the sexual kind that you seem to prefer sharing in your avatars and wallpapers. You only really started posting the non-sexual kind in this thread, to give off the impression that furry fandom isn't just about the sex.
Since I can't find the original thread, I'll have to take your word for it. I have noticed a pattern of envelope-pushing on your part, though. Kinda like what JuanBolio does, only you're subtler about it and you like to pretend you aren't doing it.
And the Genre Babe/Hunk threads have two advantages over furry threads:
1. They announce up front what they are.
2. They have humans in them.
Your furry posts don't "upset" me, I just see you trying to portray furry fandom as something that's largely non-sexual, which does not appear to be true, given the prevalence of porn-oriented furry boards vs. non-sexual "anthro art" boards.
I already pointed out where you did that. That you do one thing and say another is nothing new to me, though.
I think you might want to take another look at your avatars and wallpapers. And I don't mean just recently--you've posted furry stuff off and on for quite a while. You just didn't start a thread trying to defend it, that I can recall.
Ah, so you're moving the goalposts. No one here said you liked to yiff in a fursuit. But if you weren't sexually aroused by the kinds of things you've posted as wallpapers, one wonders what other purpose a fox with big tits in a bikini might serve.
Well, good for them. If you want to provide a good impression of furry fandom, then, I would suggest toning down the overtly sexual furry stuff and focus on the "anthro art."
Well, I didn't say you were into pedophilia--or even bestiality. I did say that I think furryism ventures a bit too close to bestiality for my liking, though. And that is going to be the gut reaction for a lot of people. If you want to show furries in a good light, bombing a desktop thread with scantily-clad foxes is not the way to do it. Like it or not, it gives a certain impression, and it is definitely not favorable.
You addressed none of Maxwell's points, John. You just wildly took him out of context and took the meaning of his posts in the most bizarre way possible. The fact is almost everything furry related that you've posted has been something sexual and then you turn around and say, "No, it's not a sexual thing, guys."That dog just ain't gonna hunt.
I can vouch for J on this one
A
Amaris
Guest
I have also posted furry avatars that are completely non-sexual. The majority of them, in fact.
By posting those images (and there are thousands upon thousands more I can get), I showed that the furry fandom isn't just about sex. In other words, I proved my assertion by backing it up. That's generally considered a good thing.
I'm not pretending anything. I know Krystal is sexual, and if you look at my signature, you can see I even imply it. I am being open about it. Yes, I do like to push the envelope, because I strongly believe in free speech and the right to post something one likes or agrees with, even if others don't. There's nothing wrong with that. There are avatars that have naked women in them, and they are clearly visible to all who can see avatars. You have not complained about them. I seem to be the one pushing the envelope because you don't like what I like to display, even though it harms no one.
I was pretty certain that the title "Furries" was going to be completely clear. If you're referring to the desktop threads, well going into it you should understand that there will be a wide variety of images, because these are people's desktops. I make a smaller viewable image, and then have it so you can see the full size desktop by clicking on it. That being said, how many people announced their desktop image up front before posting it?
Your second point is purely a matter of personal taste.
There are lots of furry boards. On each board, there is a large contingent of sexual threads and posts. There is also a large contingent of non-sexual threads and posts. I said I believe the majority is non-sexual, and I still hold to that.
That is unnecessary here. I will answer questions, but please don't start throwing snide remarks at me. I am answering your questions with respect. I ask that in return.
I do have a complete list of every furry avatar I have ever posted. The same with my wallpapers. My non-furry avs and wallpapers far, far, far outnumber my furry avs and wallpapers.
This does, however, seem to contradict your statement that I have been posting furry avs and wallpapers to show how alt I am. You now state I have been doing it on and off for quite a while. So which is it? Do I have a long history of posting furry avs and wallpapers on and off, or did I recently start posting them to show people how "alt" I am?
I'm not moving goalposts. You have, however, made many assumptions, and then when I answer them you roll right over them and make more assumptions.
Again, most of my wallpapers and avs have been non-sexual in nature. The reason you remember the ones that are is because they stand out in your mind more vividly.
I cannot control what you think of me. All I can do is answer questions and dispel assumptions and stereotypes. As for what you said, yes:
The Dead Nations said:
You did allude bestiality and pedophilia in that post. Absolutely.
That dog just ain't gonna hunt.
I addressed every point and have consistently addressed every point. I even started this thread to address such points if it became necessary. If I didn't want to answer questions and understand what people are thinking, I would have never started this thread.
I also disagree with your statement that almost every furry related thing I have posted has been sexual in nature. That is simply not true. As I said to RM, they stand out vividly in your mind, but that does not make them the vast majority.
I can vouch for J on this one
Thank you for confirming that, SPOCKED.
J.
I ... I would.
A
Amaris
Guest
That's your right to feel that way. Consider, however, if the same request was made of you. Something you enjoyed and you liked to display it from time to time, and people felt you should keep it hidden away so they don't have to look at it. I like anthro art. I display it. People here also like Star Trek, and they display that. Their favorite actors, movie scenes, their religion, their political stances. If we start telling people to remove something that makes others feel uncomfortable, on the basis of being different or unconventional, then we might as well not have avatars, or post images, because someone is always going to be offended. I don't post my images to offend, I post them because I like them.
J.
Not lately, it would seem. It's almost like you planned this, culminating in your epic "defense of furries" thread.
Because you are trying to dispel an impression that you feel is inaccurate. The existence of non-sexual furry art does not imply that furry art isn't dominated by the sexual stuff, though. Given the communities dedicated to it online, the sexual kind absolutely rules the roost.
No, you like to push the envelope because you can get people to attack you, so you can feel like a martyr. I think you're getting the impression I have a problem with sex in some way. I don't. Sex is awesome. I'd be cool with full-frontal nudity in avatars here. Implied sex with animals, though? Ew. Sorry, that's wrong, I don't care who you are.
Yeah, I suppose it "harms" no one, except in reinforcing a connection between animals and sex. I find that in itself somewhat disturbing.
Well, you're the only one who chose to draw attention to yourself by using a provocative furry desktop and then spent two pages defending it.
What can I say? My sexual tastes don't go outside the bounds of homo sapiens.
OK, J, let's make a deal. You provide me with the list of furry boards you frequent, and I'll compile a list of lesser or equal length from the ones I can find, and evaluate the number of sexual vs. non-sexual threads. How about it? What kind of result do you think you're gonna get?
You can say you're "answering questions" but you're pushing an agenda. So am I. We just happen to be at odds there.
Well, feel free to post the non-furry desktops sometime. They won't really garner much attention, I bet.
You've always done it to some degree, but you've amped it up recently. I didn't think I was very unclear about that, but there you go.
Do you or do you not get aroused by furry art? Do you or do you not think this is the least bit abnormal/unhealthy?
Of course they do. Nobody cares when you post non-creepy wallpapers.
I alluded to them in the sense that someone who is sexually excited by drawings of animals is just as far from bestiality as someone who is excited by drawings of children is from pedophilia. I didn't equate the two, both just happen to be deviant sexual preferences, and I think most people would agree that both bestiality and pedophilia are very wrong.
Because you want to make furries out to be normal and not at all weird. I mean, it's fine if that's what you're after, I'd just prefer if you'd be honest about it.
I get that J., I do. There are other avs on here that bother me. There are other pictures and suggestive images that bother me. I don't tell people to remove them even though they make me uncomfortable. You've posted several things in the past that have made me uncomfortable but I didn't tell you to take them down. However you posed the question in this thread, and I wanted to answer it honestly.
I'm big on trying not to offend people. It's part of my nature. So if I had something up and someone approached me about it, I would consider what they were saying and where they were coming from. It's not maybe the right choice, but it's the way that I am. I'm not telling you that you can't put these images up, I'm not telling you that you cannot or should not have these interests, but I am telling you that they make me uncomfortable and I do not enjoy being exposed to them.
The irony of most of these posts is that, just a few years ago, exactly the same disgust would have been spewed at those admitting to a homosexual lifestyle.
Just like homosexuality, furries are not hurting anyone. So what if they "fap off" to nude animal like pictures or are doing it in fur suites? as long as its consensual, so what? Its not like they are raping real animals or kids or whatever.
I am a furry, and for whatever reason i do not find human females sexually attractive, nor am I into bestiality as some would presume. I am, however, attracted by furry art, or more precise "scalies" (dragons and such). In such cases, how would bestiality even be possible, as these creatures don't actually exist
So you don't agree with me. But ffs, why blast us for something that harms no one?
Just like homosexuality, furries are not hurting anyone. So what if they "fap off" to nude animal like pictures or are doing it in fur suites? as long as its consensual, so what? Its not like they are raping real animals or kids or whatever.
I am a furry, and for whatever reason i do not find human females sexually attractive, nor am I into bestiality as some would presume. I am, however, attracted by furry art, or more precise "scalies" (dragons and such). In such cases, how would bestiality even be possible, as these creatures don't actually exist
So you don't agree with me. But ffs, why blast us for something that harms no one?
People bring up a lot of interesting points here. Just replace "furries" with "homosexuality" or "BDSM," and you've got a nice little discussion best suited for TNZ.
Are furries really deviant or abnormal human beings? I'm not an expert, and I can't answer that question. Typically, what we refer to as abnormal or deviant behavior is anything done excessively, harmfully, and/or disruptively; for instance, one could say porn addiction or any kind of addiction is considered a problem. Are there any behaviors or habits done by furries that harm others, are excessive, and disrupt people's lives? If anything, the people most affected are the furries themselves, not other people. My philosophy has always been that whatever people decide to do in their bedrooms is their own business so long as no one is getting hurt.
Are furries really deviant or abnormal human beings? I'm not an expert, and I can't answer that question. Typically, what we refer to as abnormal or deviant behavior is anything done excessively, harmfully, and/or disruptively; for instance, one could say porn addiction or any kind of addiction is considered a problem. Are there any behaviors or habits done by furries that harm others, are excessive, and disrupt people's lives? If anything, the people most affected are the furries themselves, not other people. My philosophy has always been that whatever people decide to do in their bedrooms is their own business so long as no one is getting hurt.
A
Amaris
Guest
The thread itself I did plan, but only after the stuff in the Desktop thread. I was curious as to how people felt about it. Other than that, no, I did not plan anything.
Sex rules everything. Star Trek always tried to appeal to the sexual interest. So did Star Wars, and just about any other genre that could appeal to targeted demographics. There are commercials that advertise mundane products that have sexuality in them. Sex sells. Sex is prevalent, sex is on people's minds quite often. The demographic of most furries falls between the ages of 16-25, of course there is going to be a large contingent of sexually charged fans. What I'm saying, and have said repeatedly, is that the entirety of the fandom isn't all about sex.
That is not true, and it is also irrelevant to this discussion.
Your perception of it is simply personal taste. I have already explained my position on that.
Since that is how you perceive it, that is your right. Again, I have already stated my position on the issue.
I displayed my desktop. Should I have changed it to something else just for the desktop thread? Or better, not posted in that thread because my desktop may offend someone? That's not right. I should be able to participate in these threads even if you don't like what I post. I respect your right to post something you like, even if I were to find it offensive, and I wouldn't ask you to remove it.
Neither do mine.
Why should I provide you with other boards I frequent? What business of that is yours in relation to what we are discussing here and now?
You can say you're "answering questions" but you're pushing an agenda. So am I. We just happen to be at odds there.
My only agenda is one that says I should be able to post what I like as long as it depicts no harm to anyone. Everything I have posted up to this point harms no one.
I post them often, far more often than furry wallpapers and avs. I have already said this.
I post a myriad of desktop images and avatars, most of them non-furry. I post what I feel like posting. I don't follow a schedule or set list.
I am interested in anthropomorphic art that is sexual in nature.
No.
"Creepy" is a matter of personal taste in this instance.
You went out of your way to put in parentheses "or children". You were equating enjoyment of anthro art with those who enjoy child pornography and having sex with animals. It's right there in the text.
I am being completely honest about it. I am answering your questions. You don't have to like the answers, but they are genuine and truthful answers.
I would have it no other way. I like the fact that you're honest. I prefer you to be honest, and that goes for RM and everyone else as well. It's why I started this thread. I was curious to know, and I wanted to answer questions.
For that, I do apologize to you if they make you feel uncomfortable, because I never had any intention of doing so. I simply posted the images that I liked.
J.
No one's blasting anyone. One of our resident furries asked for opinions on furries and got them.
Now, I don't mind what furries might get off on or not. I've seen the furry porn, too, and well, in a way I can kind of see the appeal. Then again, I'm a libertine deviant and I get off on weird and disturbing things, so I'm not helping with the reputation.
But if people post sexually tinted furry art in wallpaper threads and as avatars, they shouldn't wonder about people expressing that they're uncomfortable with it. I'm not fond of all the half-naked women getting posted on this board (and even more so in TNZ) either. I don't get why people would want to display such pictures as their wallpapers. To me, it would lessen the appeal considerably.
As for erotic furry art, it's one of the more unusual fetishes, I'd say. I have no problem with people being into that, but I don't necessarily want to be exposed to it, either, at least not unsuspectedly. I occasionally watch gay porn, but I wouldn't post sexually suggestive pics of that kind in the wallpaper thread, even if they were within board rules. If anyone does that, fine, but don't be surprised by the reactions.
Now, I don't mind what furries might get off on or not. I've seen the furry porn, too, and well, in a way I can kind of see the appeal. Then again, I'm a libertine deviant and I get off on weird and disturbing things, so I'm not helping with the reputation.
But if people post sexually tinted furry art in wallpaper threads and as avatars, they shouldn't wonder about people expressing that they're uncomfortable with it. I'm not fond of all the half-naked women getting posted on this board (and even more so in TNZ) either. I don't get why people would want to display such pictures as their wallpapers. To me, it would lessen the appeal considerably.
As for erotic furry art, it's one of the more unusual fetishes, I'd say. I have no problem with people being into that, but I don't necessarily want to be exposed to it, either, at least not unsuspectedly. I occasionally watch gay porn, but I wouldn't post sexually suggestive pics of that kind in the wallpaper thread, even if they were within board rules. If anyone does that, fine, but don't be surprised by the reactions.
Similar threads
