That was very interesting and the finding that "Furries are very liberal on social matters, but more moderate on economic topics." fits me perfectly and that is part of why I am not registered for any party, though I often refer to myself as a libertarian.

The team plans to ask furries whether they identify as libertarian, but (sadly, for what it says of the state of political knowledge) suspect that there may be problem with furries not knowing what the term means ("therian" is bad enough . . .). From someone where there is a third party actually in power (in coalition with the second party), this is a little weird.

That said, many of the people standing as "libertarian" here seem to be batshit crazy and get no media coverage, so perhaps it's not entirely unexpected.

I think I marked myself as 6 on social, and maybe 5 on economic. I make a fair amount but I still believe taxes and a reasonably large government on the whole serve us well.

The libertarians here in the states are just as batshit as they are near you, Green.

To demonstrate, there are a few counties in the States where a religious group has taken control of politics and built a haven for themselves. Heck, in the late 1800's, we even had a few working communist counties in Texas. Not one libertarian group has managed such a thing, they can't claim "hey, this county here, we made it 95% Libertarian! It can work!!"

There's a good body of work that proves Libertarianism only applies on clever bumper stickers, and the philosophy falls apart when you stick too many bumper stickers on the same car:

http://www.std.com/~mhuben/party.html

Near me . . . you mean, in Dallas? I knew about the constant threats of succession, but I wasn't aware they'd actually gone through with it!

Oh shit, sorry, I thought you were still across the pond!

Sounds about right - I'm not surprised at all with the plualistic ignorance.

Some of these findings would be interesting to compare to other groups or with society as a whole - I'm mainly curious about the gender differences and whether or not similar ratios occur in more "widespread" or common practices, minus the whole furry bit and all that. Methinks I might have to do some googling tonight, hehe.

Thanks for taking the time to write all that up. Technical writing is particularly painstaking to check and triple check - appreciate your effort in this, GreenReaper.

You probably want to look at this prior survey (scroll down to "Sexual orientation"). We have other surveys summarized if you check out that tag.

Awesome! Always love reading the results of these studies. Thanks for posting!!

An interesting read. Thanks for sharing! :)

I remember getting one or more of those surveys to fill out at conventions but never actually having time (or imagined that I did) to do it while it was possible to turn them in. I found one when [attempting to] clear out my personal room a few weeks ago.
I also have an issue with surveys in general, wherein my actual answers have analogy to the options I may select that I consider insufficient. On this one, I would need a solid definition of what the survey-taker believes constitutes "pornography" to respond at all. And with all the focus on how males answered compared to females, I wonder how the survey handled the matter of people who don't identify with either, of whom I have encountered a few. Do so few people answer the surveys at all that such an already minority figure becomes totally negligible?

But that is just the one survey! I see that there are a bunch to look at there.

Look on the bright side: You now have a valuable collectible! (The rainbow ribbon they offer for filling it out can be bought by the reel. Besides, they didn't stick it to your badge themselves, anyway, for ethics board reasons. Sadly I'm not making this up.)

What they are looking for is for you to decide what you consider pornographic. Note that they don't define "furry", "therian", "otherkin" or "human", either.

Those identifying as not male or female were left out of comparisons which pit one against the other; as far as I know, they're included in everything else. Someone in the middle might, on average, have a middling viewpoint - but I'm sure some would disagree with calling those not identifying as male or female "in the middle" (they might prefer to be "off to the side").

Yes, there are many surveys. You can collect them all!

Ethics board reasons? I'm certain that they are good reasons, but it just makes me curious, since sticking a ribbon somewhere seems to be a trivial matter.

But I suppose when it come to human behaviour, trivial things do matter.

Sticking it on a person identifies them as having completed the survey, which may cause other members of the group to be prejudicial towards them. I think that was the general argument.

I'm honestly neutral about it....most of the time (I have grumpy stages after I'm approached by creepers....creepers are no fun! D: ).

Honestly I had no idea about adult art when I joined in 2011....and even if I did know, I'd probably wouldn't have cared about it. I come here for friends and to tackle writing the subjects and things I'm into, after all that's what a fandom is all about isn't it?

Many feel that way, judging by the results!

good to feel that I'm not alone at least x_x

sometimes I feel a bit at odds when people swarm around a raffle though and describe in un-tastefully explicit detail what they want done to their characters....especially when they're significantly older or younger than me :o

Well, taste is relative. If they want an accurate commission, explicit detail may be exactly what is called for.