lol seems we need to go out and get in interviews" with our local news groups. Much like Father K-Y, We do not support the abuse of animals. and this tool is about the same as the priests boning kids. It's wrong, and should be taken care of accordingly. Not all of us are like that, not all of support it.

In my city furries are considered Child molesters and are treated the same.
http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/327052/
Please help stop Pedophiles. - TopixA local group of people right here in Albuquerque who support pedophilia and ... They're called furries. You can find out more about what a furry is at this ...
http://www.topix.com/forum/albuquer.....5HBDJEMJ4KAI82

I personally just laughed at viewing this article and gave a silent thanks to the two who turned the guy in. I don't hate or want to ban any kind of art that interests others, but that doesn't mean I will look at it if my interests are needless to say, very very low toward a particular topic.

FA will likely eat itself- and not in the fun way.

Ah shit, self vore?

Journals Of Truth (like this one) are why we should be able to "+ADD THIS JOURNAL TO FAVORITES"

98% of the world's population are drooling idiots. That explains everything.

98% of the world's population are drooling idiots
QFT. Sad, isn't it, when you find that accepting this as fact makes everything in life go smoother?

Oh Noes! Iz been banned!! being a taur..

I could honestly do without the cub art. D:

I hear ya.
I can do without snuff art.
So I don't look at it.
I could care less if people make and post snuff art.

I wonder if there was a similar phase in the evolution of the gay community? Certainly there is a least the parallel of the villification of the gay community as being a bunch of, and a haven for, freaks, perverts, and sometimes pedophiles, as well as being morally bankrupt. Less people hold to this belief now, though, and while some still do, in general, you can publicly state that you're not straight and won't have people treat you like you have the bubonic-super-leprosy. Being out as a furry? People may not take well to that. BUT, there was a time when nobody knew what it was. Some people know now, and I have the impression that most who do won't respond favorably, but I am also confident that it will change over time, and not by any amount of purging or witch hunts.

There are certainly people in the gay community who say things like "you're a bad gay," but I think we've progressed to the point that we can say, "sure, there's weirdos among us--just like the rest of you--we'll sink or swim on our merits as people, regardless of this common aspect of our identities." At least most among the LGBTQ community.

As furries, though, we're still having growing pains. When the gay rights movement started, there was no internet. But, here, we get a shit storm any time it looks like something bad might get stuck to us. This all reminds me of something I heard yesterday about the "5 stages of acceptance" or something like that, with regard to marginalized or oppressed groups. It's harder for furs because we're a less obvious group, and we haven't been a "group" for as long as the lgbtq community. I think a lot of people, particular among furs, are stuck in this "state 3" phase of "immersion" where each person takes the definition of furry (which they have defined for themselves, whether they know it or not), lives it to its fullest, and expects everybody else to comply with it, and those who don't are bad, and make a bad name for everyone else. The unfortunate thing is, it's actually a safe and comfortable place to be, because it's simple. You have your view of the world and how to be, and it's right, and anything that contradicts it or conflicts with it is wrong, but also assures you of your own superiority.

That said, I'm not entirely sure where I fall. The 5th "stage" is "synthesis," where you synthesize that identity into part of your life, and give it whatever your appropriate weight is, you can take pride in it, accept deviation from your personal style as normal and good, and you're comfortable with being open or not about that identity. I'm definitely not there yet.

Thank you. You deserve cookies for this post.

I love cookies!
I'm actually slowly exploring on my own the furry identity as one of being marginalized/oppressed, resulting from work I've done around such stuff with groups recognized as being/having been oppressed (work that includes developing leadership, confronting people with bigoted views, and finding ways to take pride in oneself without putting down your group members). While I don't think that there is anything in any way systematic about what furs face, I think the state of things very closely resembles the results of gay oppression. I think most of the problems with how we're seen will fade in time, as people will slowly start to understand it more. But, I think we can deal with the present better by borrowing from how oppressed groups cope.

Tat said, I don't know what I'm actually going to do with anything I might figure out. It'll no doubt be helpful for me. I don't see the start of any "furry liberation" movement, as I don't see the need for one in the first place.

Just to interject here, being as you mentioned the Gay community, Not to "Gay bash" and I'm NOT...but I have been, on more then one occasion, rather stunned at how many Gay's...who were previously ostracized and unaccepted, turn to others with DIFFERENT tastes..and in turn call THEM weird and unacceptable

That's not bashing at all, that is, in fact, the reality of things. It's a rather normal response--if you're marginalized, you marginalize others. From within the community, I've had people tell me that I went to the wrong clubs, that I'm not a true gay, that I haven't met anyone simply because I'm wearing the wrong clothes, my hair is too long, and I'm not a skinny twig (or that I was looking at the wrong guys and needed to find one who looked like me). All of it was done with an air of superiority, too.

*sounding like William Shatner (AKA Star Trek) O.k. were killers, but we can decide..were not gonna KILL today...just today, thats all it takes

Your quite right in what you say, we just need to be on guard to not become what we fight...remember the immortal words of Red Skelton

"We have MET the enemy.... and HE is US"

I've seen that ST episode; it's a good one. Red Skelton, I've not really seen, even though I know the name. Those two bits go together nicely, tho... We need to be aware of who and what we are, but that doesn't necessarily dictate what we will be in the future, or what we will do in the moment. Based on the decisions we make, we can move forward, or we can simply replace our enemies with ourselves.

I agree..but reading that crossed my eyes

I guess that would put me in the 6th stage. Not careing what the fuck other people think.

i think its funny that everyone is making suck a big deal NOW when this happened back in October and he's now just being sentanced for it and no EVERYONE is freaking out about it.

honestly it wasnt even that big of a story back then


oh noe another guy fucking animals and hes a furry.honestly if someone gives you shit about being a furry you tell them yourself your views on it.

ive done it plenty of times with people who are now my friends, it just takes is a few words.

Yes.

I remotly don't care what people say about furry, if your gona do dumb stuff like this you better be prepaired for the consequnces I think it's abit more than growing a pair is also about using your head and I think alot of furrys need to disconnect from the computer bacuse they think that scince they're on the internet and you don't have to accout for your actions on it, and remotely that is probally one of the biggest problems with furries, I remotly have to issues with cub,beastility and the like but if your gonna do that RL you better be ready to deal with it when and if you get caught cause as much as you think furries are understanding and "Open" they still have the base of what all of us where taught in school and the other crap from the human socity and deep down I'm almost positive we we find it as creppy or too damn f-ing weird I dunno maybe, I trying to be positive about cause no matter what I'm going to be a fur and keep on drawing cause I love theyway they make me feel inside and if you fel the need to be contraversial and stuff go for it but as I said be ready for it too bite you in the tail. I dunno hopefully i made a point, but I think i lost it. I myself have a fetish leaning towards beastility and cub but it dosen't mean I need to do it in RL

People got all worked up over *this*?

Dear Furries: People already think you're weird and should be banished from society. This is nothing new. Go about your business. XD

THIS for the f-ing WIN!

Yep, was about to say something more along the lines that people have already though the lot of us to be animal fuckers and child molesters, so what's the big fucking deal about someone actually doing it? If it shows bad on him, fine. If it shows bad on the fandom, too fucking late as we've already had shit slung at us, find a fucking umbrella so you can wade through the shit storm and get back to your lives.

Anaktis,

I hadn't heard a thing about this Troy whomever. But for some of us who'd like to see FA ban pedo and bestial art, it has nothing to do with whether they're "eeeew" or extremely rare fetishes. Nor is it a matter of fearing that the fandom will come to be associated with unusual and unpopular things. As you point out, that's a line long-since crossed. (Nor, needless to say, is it laughable superstitions like "god will punish you.")

The question's much easier-- are pedo and bestial porn causing real harm? I think an objective review shows they are. There is good evidence (not to mention ample evidence if you've ever watched TV ads) that sexualized depictions of acts make people more willing to perform those acts. That's what makes depictions specifically of predataory sexual abuse where the abused is effectively powerless, dangerous in ways that most depictions of sexuality and/or violence are not.

I hardly think we're at risk of proving the fandom's moral superiority. But the fact that you can find somebody somewhere who objects to anything you could name, hardly proves that all objections are meaningless. There's a whole universe of legitimate objections-- objections to unwarranted censorship, objections to brutality against glbt folks, objections to smoking in public places.

Judging right from wrong is more than a PR experiment, I guess is part of what I'm saying.

Oh come come now sir, questions regarding a segment of society are seldom 'easier' especially when lumping two different groups together. Everyone knows that stats generalize greatly, its the nature of the beast they have to in order to pigeonhole individuals. Given this, one can damn anything if one manage to find 2 or more of whatever that do it and happen to find something that they share. It doesn't have to be connected to anything remotely sexual. One must be extremely careful when tossing such generalizations around or one may be accused of just cooking up fear in order to generate up discord to work people up into a witch hunt.

Straight forward depictions of Pedophilia and Bestiality are already banned, as they are on practically every website on the net except for those sites which cater to such things. But we have to draw a line, I do agree, between HUMAN and NON-HUMAN. What is depicted here on this site is not activity involving human beings, so while distatesful it does not necessarily make it illegal, since human beings are not depicted, but animals and beings that have never existed. So unless it violates local blue laws, it really boils down to a matter of personal tastes.
--Onni

>>lumping two different groups together.

Note they share a key trait: they prey on those who are effectively powerless, and cannot consent to sexual relations in any way.

>> ...stats generalize... pigeonhole individuals... one can damn anything ...witch hunt...

It seems to me in these remarks that you've cobbled some meaninglessly abstract doubts into an argument that we must never judge right from wrong. I cautiously judge right from wrong based on the best evidence I have, and I'm willing to actually review it rather than essentially abdicate, saying "we dare not judge anything."

You're absolutely wrong about whether depictions of pedophilia and bestiality are banned, here on FA much less on "practically every website."

This may well be an honest mistake on your part, and I don't know how you arrive at the claim, but just to clear this up, neither requires photography or actual human subjects, or that the subjects depicted ever existed. The confusion arises because that's a distinction between kinds of pedophilic pornography that are and aren't crimes at present in U.S. jurisdictions. It has nothing to do with whether they're pedophilic or pornographic.

If you want to use that as an element of an argument, you should realize that you're arguing for nothing more than a legal status quo, not right and wrong. And legal status quo just doesn't mean that much--it's not the way the law works everywhere, and it's not a given the law can't, won't, or shouldn't change.

>>So unless it violates local blue laws, it really boils down to a matter of personal tastes.<<

That's an awfully nihilistic thing to say. Much akin to the Bush administration coercing lawyers to issue legal opinons that waterboarding isn't torture-- which it's long been undestood to be-- so that they could do it.

Some "personal tastes," for example, a taste for murder, constitute serious problems, and so are definitely things that individuals and societies can and should judge on ethical grounds.

Please sir, if you must answer my posts do so by answering the whole post without carving out little bits to engage. The lumping the two disparate groups together only succeeds in enflaming readers and deflects the question away from the stated position. When one lumps the two groups together one essentially raises the status of one while lowering the status of the other making them equal. Are you lowering the status of humans to that of animals? Aside from that, the topic of consent is a loaded one since legally one group can give consent but by rule of law is not valid, one has to delve into the into the problem of teen pregnancy and cases of affected individuals in order to find out most disturbing depths in which that goes. Animals give consent, this is a scientifically proven fact, especially since it is necessary in order to further the species. What is at the core of the latter is the breakdown of reproductive isolation mechanisms ( Those pre and post mating mechanisms that prevent the interbreeding of two different species ) betwixt individuals. I will not delve into the motivations of either group of individuals. Without sounding apologetic to either group, it must be noted that when speaking of such people or with any others that each case is different and as such cannot be painted with the same stroke of the brush. With that, let us mutually and totally disengage from the topic of Pedophiles or Bestalists. This is an art site and not the place to go into long winded discussions of such people. which many readers will no doubt not want to hear anything whatsoever about. So out of consideration to the general reading public, let us not speak of these people or what drives them. However I will say again that stats do generalize, pigeonhole individuals, can damn anything, and do stir up witch hunts. Look at the great lessons of the past, and find that the pages of history are full of such. The first step in war is to take the perceived foe and demonize them, to make them seem less than human, then its easy to not treat them as fellow beings. This is true in times of peace as it is in times of war. With the enemy on the far field or the perceived one three houses over, the steps are the same. It is good to remember that everyone is everyone else's barbarian or otherwise lowliest of the low. No one can absolutely claim the moral high ground especially when the beliefs of that moral system are based upon heavily ingrained religious belief. Thus the process of right and wrong is a subjective one based upon the beliefs system in which is prevalent in the culture one is in. It is a fact that what is acceptable in one part of the world is not necessarily what is to another in another part of the world. These differences may grate against what we ourselves believe, however anothers ways are anothers ways. Remember the world is not black and white, but a greyscale.

As for the stated views about postings, Perhaps it is you that should re-read the post. I said 'Straight forward depictions of Pedophilia and Bestiality are already banned, as they are on practically every website on the net except for those sites which cater to such things. ' its not an honest mistake. but a statement of fact taken from the experience of one who has artworks on multiple sites and viewed many a TOS. If one looks at the TOS on practially every mainstream site which accepts the postings of photos or art from its members they about universally all say that pedophilic and bestalist works are not allowed. If you do not believe me, then by all means sir, check it out. Unless they obviously make allowances for such, fur on fur and human on fur art does not apply because of the very nature of the subjects and therefor do not apply to such strictures. Your statement mashes two points of mine into one. The first approaches the topic of the nature of posts and their being forbidden, the second about legality. The very question of legality whether an actual or artificial subject is depicted therein has been argued on and settled in the courts for the time being, as it remains. If no actual person is depicted or the work has been derived from, then there is no victim and its just a case of it being a bit of art that no one likes, unless it violates local obscenity laws. This is status quo as you say, and will remain as such until such a time as yet another challenge is mounted then another battle fought, wash, rinse, repeat. More often than not status quo is the only peace achievable because the battle will always be fought back and forth. A main point centering on the very question of the a real subject being depicted hotly contested.

Come come now sir, no need to be melodramatic, This is not a question of politics and torture but of art. The appreciation or non appreciation of art is always a matter of personal taste, this is a simple statement of fact. Whether one prefers viewing paint splatters, 3D renders, realistic painted landscapes, surrealism, cubism, random bits of wire and vines strewn together, plastic preserved cadavers having a tea party , herm 'taurs going at each other 30 different ways to sunday, or illustrations of famous film screen axe murderers in all their gory glory. it is always a matter of where your personal taste lies.
--Onni

Please see http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/782940/ for my reply, since you've said you were uncomfortable talking about what we're talking about here.

Wow! An entire journal entry devoted to this? Gee the teeth on that bear trap look awfully sharp! Three flaming hoops is enough for this lion. You'll get no more attention getting tricks out of me. Crow Deus Vult and say what you will. No views are going to change, no discussion is going to be furthered, that is a waste of a page. I'm done with you.
--Onni

Suddenly, you flip out over civil discussion. Okay. Your loss.

A. Fucking. Men.