FA+
Shop
542
Views
Views
17
Favorites
Favorites
Category
All / Doodle
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 927 x 696
File Size 211.9 kB
Report this content
More from Markiliox
Listed in Folders
There is a big difference between "love for children" and "sexual love for children" :/
Seriously, I'm so sick that prejudice and misconception still exists around the fandom, especially within the babyfur/diaper community >.< Five long years or so, you thought people would have grew more open-minded and resilient of others' fetishes. But no, people still have the nerve to straight up declare that they despise certain fetishes because it's "sick and shameful", while endorsing in their own fetishes which are "sick and shameful" said by others. It's a vicious cycle! It's even more painful that they drew conclusions and judgement that we are the "sick kind of people with sick fantasies" that "brings the fandom down to its degrading". Think about it, it's because of judgements about non-furries and how they see the furry fandom makes them think of it as a "lowly place", and yet there are furries being judgmental themselves. What sense does that make? Come on guys, interests exist for a reason, and we are all here to express ourselves for that. So why are people going around telling others otherwise?
Seriously, I'm so sick that prejudice and misconception still exists around the fandom, especially within the babyfur/diaper community >.< Five long years or so, you thought people would have grew more open-minded and resilient of others' fetishes. But no, people still have the nerve to straight up declare that they despise certain fetishes because it's "sick and shameful", while endorsing in their own fetishes which are "sick and shameful" said by others. It's a vicious cycle! It's even more painful that they drew conclusions and judgement that we are the "sick kind of people with sick fantasies" that "brings the fandom down to its degrading". Think about it, it's because of judgements about non-furries and how they see the furry fandom makes them think of it as a "lowly place", and yet there are furries being judgmental themselves. What sense does that make? Come on guys, interests exist for a reason, and we are all here to express ourselves for that. So why are people going around telling others otherwise?
Category All / Doodle
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 927 x 696px
File Size 211.9 kB
Listed in Folders
realistic anatomy and sexual sitations will do nothing but bring up objective morality that says adults using kiddish things and becomming sexually stimulated is a crime against nature.
it becomes more complicated when some laws belive even something as simple "enjoy diaper life with a paci and kiddish diaper" are equated to extreme mental illness and potential pedobear,
Especially when it is voluntary.
It is just if it involves private parts the majority of the babyfur group itself squirks.
The fandom squirks at us all (and doesn't separate cub art or babyfur art period) because pleasure from objects is a sexual one by its nature in fruedian psychology. Regardless of how you put it. and Kids+pleasure+adults (even with no sex at all) == peadophelia
it becomes more complicated when some laws belive even something as simple "enjoy diaper life with a paci and kiddish diaper" are equated to extreme mental illness and potential pedobear,
Especially when it is voluntary.
It is just if it involves private parts the majority of the babyfur group itself squirks.
The fandom squirks at us all (and doesn't separate cub art or babyfur art period) because pleasure from objects is a sexual one by its nature in fruedian psychology. Regardless of how you put it. and Kids+pleasure+adults (even with no sex at all) == peadophelia
Society is actually getting MORE conservative TBH when it comes to this stuff.
Infantilism / Fetishes / etc as a whole is likely to be criminalized, regardless of details and whom or what is involved.
You can blame philosophical splitting over the Moral Hazards created during the rehabilitation or permanent incarceration phases of related criminal convictions across the globe.
Infantilism / Fetishes / etc as a whole is likely to be criminalized, regardless of details and whom or what is involved.
You can blame philosophical splitting over the Moral Hazards created during the rehabilitation or permanent incarceration phases of related criminal convictions across the globe.
after this http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/.....569dcdc32.html and so many other cases im not so sure.
ah hem.
Her, and She.
If you honestly think that being transgender is a "fetish" then I pity your lack of knowledge.
Honestly, do you even realize how offensive what you just said is? Being transgender is not a "fetish" it's a part of who someone is, just as much as your skin or hair color is. Transgender people have had to compromise just to be safe around Cisgender people who would oppress them and try to silence them or MURDER them just for being trans. God forbid a teen has enough sense to fight for the right to use the restroom that fits with their actual gender and not the one forced on them by society.
To compare being Transgender to being a Pedophile is just as bad, if not worse, than comparing being a Babyfur or Diaperfur with being a Pedophile.
Also, to make sure you understand what I meant about the skin color thing, people are BORN transgender, it is biologically a part of us as much as skin color or your natural hair color is. You can try to hide it, but it will ALWAYS be there, laws that would fight against transgender are dehumanizing, and just as bad as laws against people of color were before the civil rights movement.
Her, and She.
If you honestly think that being transgender is a "fetish" then I pity your lack of knowledge.
Honestly, do you even realize how offensive what you just said is? Being transgender is not a "fetish" it's a part of who someone is, just as much as your skin or hair color is. Transgender people have had to compromise just to be safe around Cisgender people who would oppress them and try to silence them or MURDER them just for being trans. God forbid a teen has enough sense to fight for the right to use the restroom that fits with their actual gender and not the one forced on them by society.
To compare being Transgender to being a Pedophile is just as bad, if not worse, than comparing being a Babyfur or Diaperfur with being a Pedophile.
Also, to make sure you understand what I meant about the skin color thing, people are BORN transgender, it is biologically a part of us as much as skin color or your natural hair color is. You can try to hide it, but it will ALWAYS be there, laws that would fight against transgender are dehumanizing, and just as bad as laws against people of color were before the civil rights movement.
Are we having logical debate or an emotional debate? if logical then no, your not born Trans no more so then I was born AB/DL its a developed desire. there is no tran DNA no Tran Chemical, people choose to emotionally decide they want to be physically something they arnt and that's fine as long as they keep it private, what I don't think is fine is forcing a belief on someone else and painting them as the bad guy when they don't endorse your way of thinking.
Secondarily the entire "trans culture" is based on sexists views on women. Having long hair, wearing make up,dressing in ways that societies gender rolls expect women to dress and having the right "genitals" for a women, all rather sexist views if you ask me. If its truly about Identifying the way you feel then it shouldn't matter what others think, maybe your the women that uses the men restroom or the man that wears skirts or acts just like how you look in public if its not all about getting attention it shouldn't matter what boxes society labels you with you know what you are and nobody out side of personal people need to.
On the subject of Trans being killed. im sure it has happened but it is such a small number that it doesn't even begin to show on the charts and so does not work in a logical argument. im sure I could make the statement that their have been serial killers who were Trans sexual and have as valid an emotional argument as you have derided from that statement.
Lastly If I decided I was a chicken and went about naked acting like one and pecking the dirt and in general doing chickeny things would I be a chicken? No no more so then some one believing that they are a gender their DNA isnt.
Secondarily the entire "trans culture" is based on sexists views on women. Having long hair, wearing make up,dressing in ways that societies gender rolls expect women to dress and having the right "genitals" for a women, all rather sexist views if you ask me. If its truly about Identifying the way you feel then it shouldn't matter what others think, maybe your the women that uses the men restroom or the man that wears skirts or acts just like how you look in public if its not all about getting attention it shouldn't matter what boxes society labels you with you know what you are and nobody out side of personal people need to.
On the subject of Trans being killed. im sure it has happened but it is such a small number that it doesn't even begin to show on the charts and so does not work in a logical argument. im sure I could make the statement that their have been serial killers who were Trans sexual and have as valid an emotional argument as you have derided from that statement.
Lastly If I decided I was a chicken and went about naked acting like one and pecking the dirt and in general doing chickeny things would I be a chicken? No no more so then some one believing that they are a gender their DNA isnt.
you seem to be confused, please go read this blog and educate yourself. http://dearcispeople.tumblr.com/
There is scientific evidence that proves that someone who is Transgender has the brain structure that more closely matches that of cisgender people of their gender identity more than their gender that was assigned at birth.
So far, by looking it up, there have been 23 transgender murders this year alone, chances are 0 of the murderers have actually gone to jail, or even gotten a punishment, not because they haven't gone to court, they likely have, but because of the "trans panic defense" still being legal in 49 states. That is only the murders we know of.
Nobody, and I mean NOBODY would CHOOSE to be discriminated against. Try telling that to an African American person, see where it gets you. I won't say there aren't people doing bad things who are transgender(quite frankly, it's like a cosmic rule, someone, somewhere, is doing something bad and likes the things you like, or does things you do)
https://www.newscientist.com/articl.....on-brain-scan/
https://pure.knaw.nl/portal/files/5....._285_swaab.pdf
It is clear you are ignorant on this matter, if you had actually researched this stuff you would know that yes Transgender individuals ARE born that way, no it is NOT something people choose, and NO Transgender people are not sexist.
If you had even looked into the transgender community then you would have found just as much variety there as there is here.
Honestly, stop dehumanizing transgender individuals, I'm really getting tired of having to explain things to people who didn't take the time to actually do the research.
There is scientific evidence that proves that someone who is Transgender has the brain structure that more closely matches that of cisgender people of their gender identity more than their gender that was assigned at birth.
So far, by looking it up, there have been 23 transgender murders this year alone, chances are 0 of the murderers have actually gone to jail, or even gotten a punishment, not because they haven't gone to court, they likely have, but because of the "trans panic defense" still being legal in 49 states. That is only the murders we know of.
Nobody, and I mean NOBODY would CHOOSE to be discriminated against. Try telling that to an African American person, see where it gets you. I won't say there aren't people doing bad things who are transgender(quite frankly, it's like a cosmic rule, someone, somewhere, is doing something bad and likes the things you like, or does things you do)
https://www.newscientist.com/articl.....on-brain-scan/
https://pure.knaw.nl/portal/files/5....._285_swaab.pdf
It is clear you are ignorant on this matter, if you had actually researched this stuff you would know that yes Transgender individuals ARE born that way, no it is NOT something people choose, and NO Transgender people are not sexist.
If you had even looked into the transgender community then you would have found just as much variety there as there is here.
Honestly, stop dehumanizing transgender individuals, I'm really getting tired of having to explain things to people who didn't take the time to actually do the research.
The stuff that NoxVulpes was bringing up and then arguing about being true is why I hate the world today. The world is so screwed up. I hate it. People demonize other people's interests because they don't understand them or they're just to arrogant or just don't even care about trying to understand them. One group of people I just can't stand are Furry Haters. I HATE those people. Saying things like "Furries must die!" or "Furries must burn!" but the one that pisses me off the most is "Furries are a sin upon God's name! Furries sin upon God by having sex with animals! Furries are the Devil's work! Furries belong in Hell!" Every time i hear anything like that, I just want to kill someone. I was once targeted by a cult of Christian Extreamists, who wanted to fucking tie me to a cross and leave me to die. They said it was the only way to pay for my sin. And that sin was "Beastiality." They left me alone though eventually. I'm actually a Christian and I go to church. I don't have any problems with any fetishes. None. I guess my point in all this is, WHY THE FUCK DOES EVERYONE IN THIS FUCKING WORLD HAVE TO BE SO FUCKING STUPID AND SO FUCKING INGNORANT!?!?!?
all right lets look at these studies.
"18 female-to-male transsexual people who’d had no treatment and compared them with those of 24 males and 19 females."
to small of numbers to be used in any real form of debate or science.
"18 male-to-female transsexual people with that in 19 males and 19 females."
once again any debate teacher , coach or scientist would tell you, to small of a sampling.
"23 transgender murders this year alone,"
Yes and over a thousand "straight" people have been murdered this year your point being? the number means nothing with out proof of motivation or hate on the part of the murders and from what I could find it was just your every day gang violence and crime.Still even if the evidence pointed towards hate ( which it does not) you are still looking at a unworkable number.
finally https://pure.knaw.nl/portal/files/5....._285_swaab.pdf , seven trans studied all of whom happened to be 10 to 13 years younger then the control group, Im sure I don't have to point out the number or age problem with this.
so no I looked, I read, I just didn't feel the need to validate myself when there wasn't a argument to my case. DNA is the basic frame work and it determines your gender.
"18 female-to-male transsexual people who’d had no treatment and compared them with those of 24 males and 19 females."
to small of numbers to be used in any real form of debate or science.
"18 male-to-female transsexual people with that in 19 males and 19 females."
once again any debate teacher , coach or scientist would tell you, to small of a sampling.
"23 transgender murders this year alone,"
Yes and over a thousand "straight" people have been murdered this year your point being? the number means nothing with out proof of motivation or hate on the part of the murders and from what I could find it was just your every day gang violence and crime.Still even if the evidence pointed towards hate ( which it does not) you are still looking at a unworkable number.
finally https://pure.knaw.nl/portal/files/5....._285_swaab.pdf , seven trans studied all of whom happened to be 10 to 13 years younger then the control group, Im sure I don't have to point out the number or age problem with this.
so no I looked, I read, I just didn't feel the need to validate myself when there wasn't a argument to my case. DNA is the basic frame work and it determines your gender.
I'm sorry, do you carry a dna scanning device with you everywhere you go? no? didn't think so.
DNA Is FAR more than just XX and XY, and even then there are people born with XX who have male sex traits and people who are born with XY and have female sex traits. One thing you seem to forget is that the only difference in the DNA, is that one pair of chromosomes, everything else is the same aside from the XX, and XY chromosomes, known as the sex chromosomes, supposedly the only factors in determining sex. However because of the many cases of people born intersex and of the opposite sex with those 2 basic versions of the sex chromosomes it would appear they play a smaller role in determining sex and gender than you would try to make people to believe.
The study showed a trend in the brain patterns of the subjects.
Also, the sample sizes are actually good enough for at most a 22.4% margin of error compared to the general population.
Less than 1/4 chances of it being wrong about the general population. You don't seem to understand how studies work, they don't need larger sample sizes, though it does help, to get a mostly accurate representation of the population at large.
If I look at the total number of participants in both the FtM and MtF numbers, the percentage would be closer to 13% margin of error, less than 1/6 chances of being wrong compared to the general population. To put it in other terms you may understand, that gives the study a 3/4 or a 5/6 chance of being accurate about the population at large.
You should really learn to look at results relative to the sample size and the margin of error rather than dismissing based solely on the number of people involved without looking into all the scientific components.
In short, you have nothing to scientifically support your ramblings about how transgender is a learned trait and not something you are born with, while there is stuff to support the opposite, that transgender individuals are born that way.
DNA Is FAR more than just XX and XY, and even then there are people born with XX who have male sex traits and people who are born with XY and have female sex traits. One thing you seem to forget is that the only difference in the DNA, is that one pair of chromosomes, everything else is the same aside from the XX, and XY chromosomes, known as the sex chromosomes, supposedly the only factors in determining sex. However because of the many cases of people born intersex and of the opposite sex with those 2 basic versions of the sex chromosomes it would appear they play a smaller role in determining sex and gender than you would try to make people to believe.
The study showed a trend in the brain patterns of the subjects.
Also, the sample sizes are actually good enough for at most a 22.4% margin of error compared to the general population.
Less than 1/4 chances of it being wrong about the general population. You don't seem to understand how studies work, they don't need larger sample sizes, though it does help, to get a mostly accurate representation of the population at large.
If I look at the total number of participants in both the FtM and MtF numbers, the percentage would be closer to 13% margin of error, less than 1/6 chances of being wrong compared to the general population. To put it in other terms you may understand, that gives the study a 3/4 or a 5/6 chance of being accurate about the population at large.
You should really learn to look at results relative to the sample size and the margin of error rather than dismissing based solely on the number of people involved without looking into all the scientific components.
In short, you have nothing to scientifically support your ramblings about how transgender is a learned trait and not something you are born with, while there is stuff to support the opposite, that transgender individuals are born that way.
No the numbers don't work that way, I'm trying to even figure out were you pulled that figure from and no matter how bias I twist the facts I still cant see how you came to that number or to that so called fact. https://gendertrender.wordpress.com.....now-it-anyway/ there if you wish to see other reasons ( aside from still the numbers) that the entire brain pattern theory is incorrect and harmful to the tran community.
Now I never made the statement that you couldn't be born with a proclivity towards Transgender. People can be born with a weekness towards alcoholism or depression or a tendency in the family towards violence. why shouldn't people also have a tendency in certain families to have a weakness to thinking they are something they are not.
Lastly I really cant debate with you if your going to ignore DNA, their is really is nothing else we can discuss if you will so blindly clamor against something that is just a basic fact.you may countering all you want but know that I will not be responding or checking.
Now I never made the statement that you couldn't be born with a proclivity towards Transgender. People can be born with a weekness towards alcoholism or depression or a tendency in the family towards violence. why shouldn't people also have a tendency in certain families to have a weakness to thinking they are something they are not.
Lastly I really cant debate with you if your going to ignore DNA, their is really is nothing else we can discuss if you will so blindly clamor against something that is just a basic fact.you may countering all you want but know that I will not be responding or checking.
I got the % by simply researching the correlation between sample size and margin of error.
DNA would claim more similarity between male and female than difference, you can not ignore DNA as a whole if you wish to use it in a argument.
Also, that thing you linked is flawed it's two groups are "homosexual and nonhomosexual" I had to laugh when I saw that. Reading further I just found the article you linked to to be utter BS.
It's as crazy as Freud's BS about everything being sexually driven and somehow relating to everyone's mother. I've always been Transgender, my earliest conscious memory is of my 4th b-day, blowing out the candle, and inwardly wishing I was born a girl. I had no sexual desires at that age.
That entire article was based on the assumption that transsexual women are just extremely homosexual men. The article flat out ignores the FtM population.
DNA would claim more similarity between male and female than difference, you can not ignore DNA as a whole if you wish to use it in a argument.
Also, that thing you linked is flawed it's two groups are "homosexual and nonhomosexual" I had to laugh when I saw that. Reading further I just found the article you linked to to be utter BS.
It's as crazy as Freud's BS about everything being sexually driven and somehow relating to everyone's mother. I've always been Transgender, my earliest conscious memory is of my 4th b-day, blowing out the candle, and inwardly wishing I was born a girl. I had no sexual desires at that age.
That entire article was based on the assumption that transsexual women are just extremely homosexual men. The article flat out ignores the FtM population.
No, trans culture is not based on sexist views. Trans culture is based on wanting us to look like how we see ourselves. Most of us don't care what genitals others have and not all of us are getting rid of what we were born with. Besides, trans culture isn't just transgirl, or even transboys - there are bigender, agender, genderfluid, all underneath the trans umbrella.
Lastly, that last analogy is really out of wack. DNA =/= to our minds. Nothing in our DNA says how smart we will be or what our personality will be. Nor our gender or sexuality.
Lastly, that last analogy is really out of wack. DNA =/= to our minds. Nothing in our DNA says how smart we will be or what our personality will be. Nor our gender or sexuality.
First of all read this argument:
https://coelsblog.wordpress.com/201.....y-is-nonsense/
The arguement presented in this submission is really pointless and you are never going to stop people from beating up on each other (and potentially shooting you) for your love of diapers. No matter what. All you can do is Honour the Laws of wherever you are and whatever you are comfortable with.
And don't really try to convince others who have lower tolerances for "squirkyness" (push your fetish on other poeple who don't want it).
Then understand this (I don't agree but hear me out on this). Many people believe and understand this, and if your law follows objective morality more then an "actual act" then you are going to face the same penalties reguardless of what you draw or how you express yourself.
Objective morality will always equate pleasure with objects as a sexual thing no matter how badly we argue with our forensic psychologists and other mental health experts. Mostly because diapers ARE pushing against ACTIVE sex organs and (caretaking actions wiping the bottom, crinkles and diaper involve involuntary touching) therefore touching equates to sexual stimulation. Children under 4 have no "Active" but adults do, anything portraying children "enjoying" babyhood is a crime against nature.
And hence it is also the same for adults. Adults are cupable, children below the age of consent are not. Therefore Adults commit a crime when being infantilists, and children are not. The Involvement of ACTUAL children is irrelavant to perception here.
And of course "anything to do with a child" is zero tolerance for grownups to touch. Including the clothes they wear (past 4) and the things we use to make them talk, walk, or learn to use the bathroom with. Including Pacifiers or Bottles.
You can blame the fact that mind medicine has not moved beyond Frued in his interpretations of this type of development where it comes to how an external third party viewer views another person deriving "pleasure" from a "protected object". Object pleasure by its nature is sexual, and therefore deriving pleasure from Children's objects is the same thing as sexual crimes against them.
Add the fact "involuntary sexual stimulation" is a form of sexual assault in most of the Civilized World and it is often used to convict adults of sexual offences.
https://coelsblog.wordpress.com/201.....y-is-nonsense/
The arguement presented in this submission is really pointless and you are never going to stop people from beating up on each other (and potentially shooting you) for your love of diapers. No matter what. All you can do is Honour the Laws of wherever you are and whatever you are comfortable with.
And don't really try to convince others who have lower tolerances for "squirkyness" (push your fetish on other poeple who don't want it).
Then understand this (I don't agree but hear me out on this). Many people believe and understand this, and if your law follows objective morality more then an "actual act" then you are going to face the same penalties reguardless of what you draw or how you express yourself.
Objective morality will always equate pleasure with objects as a sexual thing no matter how badly we argue with our forensic psychologists and other mental health experts. Mostly because diapers ARE pushing against ACTIVE sex organs and (caretaking actions wiping the bottom, crinkles and diaper involve involuntary touching) therefore touching equates to sexual stimulation. Children under 4 have no "Active" but adults do, anything portraying children "enjoying" babyhood is a crime against nature.
And hence it is also the same for adults. Adults are cupable, children below the age of consent are not. Therefore Adults commit a crime when being infantilists, and children are not. The Involvement of ACTUAL children is irrelavant to perception here.
And of course "anything to do with a child" is zero tolerance for grownups to touch. Including the clothes they wear (past 4) and the things we use to make them talk, walk, or learn to use the bathroom with. Including Pacifiers or Bottles.
You can blame the fact that mind medicine has not moved beyond Frued in his interpretations of this type of development where it comes to how an external third party viewer views another person deriving "pleasure" from a "protected object". Object pleasure by its nature is sexual, and therefore deriving pleasure from Children's objects is the same thing as sexual crimes against them.
Add the fact "involuntary sexual stimulation" is a form of sexual assault in most of the Civilized World and it is often used to convict adults of sexual offences.
Heh, for the real world. It's a crime, for people who just draw it, It isn't a crime. It isn't real, so doesn't harm anyone. It could cause something, but what fetish hasn't caused something. :/
Some people do forget that rule 34 comes in many shapes and can characterized to anything sexual.
But also some don't know why the person likes it, so why should they really judge?
Some people do forget that rule 34 comes in many shapes and can characterized to anything sexual.
But also some don't know why the person likes it, so why should they really judge?
Yeah, I'm gonna side with the not awful. Characters can be small/tiny and ambiguous.But ultimately it comes down to size depiction. It doesn't matter if you draw someone that's the size of a 3 year old that's a 2000 year old demoness. Games like Tera can go get screwed, along with the other creepy stuff on the 3DS eShop.
Lets not pretend we're little kids here, For the sake of the argument. Arguing an absurd standpoint will always be arguing an absurd standpoint. Characters whose ages and depictions are well stated are quite definitive. You have an adult version of your fursona in sexual acts, and ones that are babyfur that are far from it. I'd hate to think these are artists choices and not ones of your own choosing.
Comments