FA+
Shop
The war on Ferals
3 years ago
An almost yearly recurring phenomenon in the fandom drew my attention recently, the push against feral themed art, and this time it affected several artists I follow so I decided to look a bit more in depth,and I got surprised to see that a lot of the individuals pushing this stupid narrative where very young and mostly left leaning queer furries, and it puzzled me greatly (before anyone gets any funny ideas yes I'm queer and lefty too) and it kept me wondering what kind of idea these people have in mind and what is the great plan behind it, and I'm mean "plan" because I don't doubt there's influential individuals pushing this, I've seen some even theorizing that this part of a vengeance attempt done by ex-Kiwi Farms users after the death of the site, it would make sense since alot of furries where very loud during the campaing to bring it down (based as fuck by the way) and also KF users were mostly far right reactionaries known to cause harm to non-normative people....it's possible but I don't know if it holds much water.
In any case these puriteens can go fuck themselves, as the time passed I learned that the opinion of people who joined the fandom recently has to be mostly ignored, specially those who can't handle the natural weirdness of the group, they end up learning how to accept it or leaving because they were just experimenting something new.
But also, doesn't mean the opinion or actions of older creators should be considered in any shape or form divine , I've seem plenty of older artists saying remarkably stupid shit...
I had a entire script to make this kind of an essay but I forgot it so I will conclude it like this: never do shit to please normies in the hopes they will leave you alone, normies will always find something to mock you for if you are different, and if you keep chopping parts of your weirdness to please the grey mob, eventually you will become like them...and specially NEVER bow your head for those who call you "degenerate", this word has been used before to justify a lot of atrocities and crimes against liberty,usually those who use it are not good people.
In any case these puriteens can go fuck themselves, as the time passed I learned that the opinion of people who joined the fandom recently has to be mostly ignored, specially those who can't handle the natural weirdness of the group, they end up learning how to accept it or leaving because they were just experimenting something new.
But also, doesn't mean the opinion or actions of older creators should be considered in any shape or form divine , I've seem plenty of older artists saying remarkably stupid shit...
I had a entire script to make this kind of an essay but I forgot it so I will conclude it like this: never do shit to please normies in the hopes they will leave you alone, normies will always find something to mock you for if you are different, and if you keep chopping parts of your weirdness to please the grey mob, eventually you will become like them...and specially NEVER bow your head for those who call you "degenerate", this word has been used before to justify a lot of atrocities and crimes against liberty,usually those who use it are not good people.
What gets me is the total ignorance of the place imagination and fiction play in art and characters it shows. It's really narrow-minded, conservative, and puritanical. It strikes me as pretty ignorant.
I do wonder how it all got started. It would be interesting for someone to trace this back.
It's one of those weak crusades that sounds good unless you look at it for 2 seconds, where it falls apart, but they don't have the attention span for that anyways so it works out
Just another baseless craze formed because dealing with actual problems in the fandom is too hard and doesn't get you as many retweets as easily
Aaaaaaaand of course the people trying to 'normalize' the fandom because they think big corporations getting involved is a good thing???
Anyone who tries to police the internet and drive people to suicide for no reason is not even a human of you ask me. So ignore them and hope they learn the same.
They have a clearly evil side. As a collective they are cowardly bullies, and they persecute and doxx people. I despise that side of them.
But they are also a repository of good information, and everyone and everything there isn't evil. It's complicated. At least as they were they made what they were doing obvious. They were upfront about it. Now they are likely to be driven (More) underground, where they could actually be less transparent and even more dangerous.
Censorship is a double-edged sword. Who will be next? I find it scary how easy it seems to be to do this, and it seems to be getting easier.
Look, the fact that they have good info actually makes it worse because that legitimizes their bad info. Ya know, like how Fox News has the occasional correct thing but then immediately cuts to Tucker Carlson. The only way to make this correct, to make this work, to make this not Kiwi Farms or Fox News is to not have the bad stuff at all. These sites can moderate, I have first hand evidence of such, those that don't deserve to burn in hell.
We were shown we could not trust Kiwifarms, full stop, end of story, it's their own damn fault for cleaning the grenade launcher while it was loaded with no safety.
Much as I hate Fox News, I wouldn't censor them. Call 'em out.
Who's next? Good sites and sources on the left have already been victims of internet purges.
But censorship can just be a game of whack-a-mole. There's always another source of crap information. It's everyone's responsibility to learn critical media literacy, and it should also be required learning in school.
Information is vexingly difficult to police. Whether you choose to believe it or not, slippery slopes do exist, and censorship is one of them. That being said, private parties do have the right to censor people, Drumpf and Twitter being a prime example. Was that a good thing? I'll admit that I thought that was a good decision, but it also had the downside of driving him more underground, and martyring him in the eyes of his gang of simps. Twitter was never much of a valid source of information anyway. Once again, it gets complicated fast.
The abolition of the fairness doctrine under Reagan was a critical moment in the downward slide of corporate media as well, IMO.
All I'm saying is that I've seen websites who are able to moderate but refuse to and end up as Nazi havens. Meanwhile, the one site I can agree is not a Nazi haven does moderate in real time yet nobody knows of it (counter social in case you're curious).
Think of it like a bar, if someone gets rowdy, you cut them off and kick them out, right? Why not do that for websites?
I'm not one of those free speech absolutists that would leverage that to excuse fascism or bullying, but I have to acknowledge that there's nuance there.
Good moderation of a site is crucial. Something like Twitter has proven themselves incapable of it, in spite of having a responsibility and right to do so, probably at least equally because of their size and an unwillingness to devote the necessary resources, which ultimately comes down to greed.
I've also heard that Mastodon is a better social media alternative, but I've never checked it out. FA may be as close to that stuff as I get. I have enough things to do with my time and energy as it is.
You can't use slippery slope arguments for anything with nuance, vietnam was fought because of this slippery slope nonsense. In the end the result is meaningless and the method is what's needed. Bans on the kind of things that propagate Nazism and falsehoods for example.
The domino theory/ slippery slope justification for the Vietnam war had a lot more holes than just that, too.
harder this time.
KF is, however, complicated by the fact that everyone on there isn't a right winger.
Either in quantity or level of violence.