Wario Forums

stupidface
stupidface
>implying I'm a furry because I have an anthro kink
Ackshually no, furry culture is some of the worst crap out there and I wouldn't be caught dead prancing around in public in what is frankly fetish gear HUGGING CHILDREN. "iT's nOt A fEtIsH" is bullshit, they're a bunch of delusional manchildren trying to pass off their shit as an innocent hobby, basically the same as the pedo Ashley subculture.
but more relevant to your post yes I think Warner Bros. was home to some of the first furfags, they sexualized their anthro characters way more than Disney ever did in those days and it's a little suspect
tahutoa
tahutoa
well, even if that is the case, a little bitty kid running up and hugging a fuzzy pseudo-animal will still melt my heart. and uhhh i'm pretty sure an anthro kink is what defines you as one, if only at the basest level. and for some of them, i'd imagine it's just another form of dysphoria, like with trans people inb4 crossing over biologically. Obviously I'm playing devil's advocate here but in cultures as diverse as... that... it'd be unfair to write everyone off. Some people play the mall Santa because they're nice dudes who like making kids happy-- they're old, not like they have anything better to do, y'know? I'd imagine for some of them it's the same thing-- like Pooh Bear when you go to Disney World.

...I just reminded myself that I failed to get Pooh's attention at the end of that person's shift, when we went to the Christmas party-- I didn't get a high-five because of the costume's limited visibility and it hurt my soul, even despite those mascots' borderline uncanny valley appearance.
Anyway, nonetheless, your way of denominating is immediately more applicable.

I propose this nomenclature for differentiating:

Anthro kink: yeeeah buddy; e621 ho
Furry: the ones who dress up because they find it enjoyable or because it makes them feel better. the kind you'll see at disneyland.
furfag: ohhh nooooo
stupidface
stupidface
I won't deny that that's a generalization, but when you look at the facts it's abundantly clear that the very, very, VERY vast majority of furries are in it for the fetish and are either delusional or lying through their teeth (there are multiple polls to prove this). And you know what? That's fine, I don't give a shit what people are into, but it's the publicization of the fetish and the lengths they will go to to lie about the morality behind it that gets me.

That fursuiting is "therapeutic" or represents a non-sexual side of their literal fetish is not an excuse, because no matter how you look at it that's still rooted in the fetish and is sexual by nature. It's the same as people in the BDSM community back when they wore low-key fetish gear in public to "be themselves" and got called out for it immediately. Furries just have an excuse for it. I refuse to believe somebody would blow a couple grand on a suit because "it's a hobby".

r/yiffinhell is recommended viewing if you want an endless source of proof that most furries are disgusting liars
tahutoa
tahutoa
Eh, I'm too uninformed on the subject, I'll just have to take your word for it.

Nyeh, I suppose so, but regardless of whether it's intended to be an excuse or not, there really are some people that spend their disposable income on that and don't intend it to be sexual at all. After all, with that line of thinking, it wouldn't be too outlandish to say "I refuse to believe somebody would blow a couple grand on a computer because 'it's a hobby'." Whether something is ROOTED in a fetish doesn't really matter if the end result is wholly unrelated, I think.
For example, if a person A) really digs listening to elevator tunes during, or whatever and B) decides to compose a whole album of new elevator tunes, publishing it to the world, on one hand you could argue that he "only did it because he gets off to it," but on the other hand what that brought about is a supreme good-- unless you hate muzak, of course. Obviously this line of reasoning, or at least the way I've presented it, is full of holes I'm sure.
I may not be into BDSM myself, but pointing at someone like "NO YOU'RE JUST DOING THAT BECAUSE YOU LIKE HAVING SEX WITH IT" is kind of a shit reason to denounce them. Sure, maybe it's correct, maybe it isn't, but it's not exactly driving a buster sword through an old lady on the metro. Not quite that deserving of revulsion and kickin' dat kirbeh to da curb.

[Mr. Magoo, as Ebenezer Scrooge]: I think I'd rather not. (also, reaffirming an opinion like that breeds only seething hatred my nigga, might wanna cut down on the visitations, there)

uhh this concludes my counter-argument?
PS: i noticed you put periods outside your quotations! are you a #limey-bastard?
stupidface
stupidface
Nah look, I'm not out to demonize everybody who falls under the umbrella of "furry" because there are even some in the community that agree with my viewpoints on fursuiting and why all that shit shouldn't be socially acceptable, but it's definitely a group that attracts bad people and breeds ignorance. I think that's something most people in the know will agree with. What I have the most issue with isn't that they like what they like or do what they do, it's that it can go to some really bad places, like, you know, pedo shit. That's been on the rise for awhile now and nothing is being done about it.

but I'll cut this short because you get the picture, I don't like furries and don't associate with them (cuz being obsessed with this shit & forming a lifestyle around it is different than "I have a private kink for it")

PS: no I am actually the big gay #yeehaw-redneck
Top