Creative Commons license icon

Are we scaring away potential furry fans? Google says yes.

Your rating: None Average: 3.1 (17 votes)

Google suggestions: Furries are ... sick, weird and creepyI detest unnecessary wordiness, but keeping it short just doesn't work.

Before I begin, I would like to present an apology of sorts to Patch Packrat. I very much dislike to be misunderstood, but also cannot stand to be the source of said misunderstanding. I guess I should have been more clear with my choice of words.

Now, with that out of the way, today's topic.

Throughout the years, I have been around the various reaches of the web, and met a ton of really good artists. Many really liked to draw humanized animals (for fun and profit). For some, the subject made up most of their galleries; some drew furries exclusively. As we conversed, the topic of furries inevitably arose. Aside from the occasional "yep, I'm a furry", most replies went something like this:

  1. I like drawing talking animals, but I don't have a fursona/fursuit, so I'm not a furry.
  2. I like drawing talking animals, but to me it's not a "lifestyle", so I'm not a furry.
  3. Furries are creepy, and I don't want to be associated with them.

Answer #3 was the most prevalent.

Furry fandom is swimming in drama, and most furries seem to like it that way. But I am not here to build the ranks for Burned Furs Pt II. I am not here to tell you how to live your life, or argue on what is right or wrong. I am here to ask different questions.

As I mentioned, without naming any names, there are hundreds (if not thousands) of young, talented artists who like to draw anthropomorphic content. Most of them do not want to join the furry fandom because they are legitimately afraid. You can probably guess why from Google's suggestions. They are afraid for their reputation.

Flayrah is one of the leading furry news sources. When somebody new finds this site and scrolls down out of curiosity, what do they find? Why, lovely stories like "Boise furry arrested, accused of having sex with cat". While far from the most common type of article here, these are the ones that WILL get the attention of an average person. We are wired that way; it's impossible to help this.

What does that article has to do with furry? Freaking NOTHING, that's what. Who cares if a crazy person who fucked a cat/molested a child/murdered 99 people identifies as a furry? And why are we giving them publicity?

More importantly, why the need to display private (your sex life, orientation) and disturbing (man fucks his cat) things in front of everyone? Does the world really need to know that? Does it WANT to?

...

After all I said above, many might say "I don't care! I do what I want, and if it offends people, then nuts to them!"

Sure, of course, you can live on your little furry island, have only furry friends and not give two shits about what non-furries think about you.

Still, I have one last thing to add. Think of all the young fans of anthropomorphics; fans who would surely enjoy joining a fandom of like-minded individuals. And yet, they hesitate, because they don't want to be seen close to a bunch of weirdos.

I would like to close this piece with a rant [1.8Mb MP3] from everyone's favorite Gryphon. Quite relevant, I say.

Comments

Your rating: None Average: 3.8 (4 votes)

Google also said at one point in time that Santorum is a froth of semen and anal juices. That was until it looked like he was going to win the primary after he took Iowa in 2012. Case closed.

In addition, while I do think the story about the incident in question is warranted for a furry news site, your article pointing out said incident when time would have buried it is not helping.

I believe in acknowledging said incidents and the heinous acts of the individuals, but not to panic as if it's what people are judging us as being 'weird' about. Maybe they just find the costumes thing weird. Maybe they aren't thinking what you think they're thinking. I by definition think that all humanity is weird, the gift of cognition makes us weird in the grand scheme of the universe. So to me the problem is the adversity to the word weird, which I think is-- weird.

Your homework is to name me one group of people who are accepted by everyone.

Your rating: None Average: 4.2 (6 votes)

You still haven't answered the main question: why the need to display your private life in front of everyone?

Well, I'll be...

Your rating: None Average: 4.2 (5 votes)

What is considered private depends on the person and where they are. In some places, sexuality is taboo; elsewhere, it is worn on your sleeve (or a handkerchief). Similarly, in some places, it is common for everyone to ask how much you earn, while it would be a grave faux pas elsewhere.

Furry fandom brings together people of many cultures and nationalities, with differing traditions of privacy. Our audience is no different, and this is one reason you see discussion as to the appropriateness of stories.

Your rating: None Average: 1.5 (2 votes)

I think that the problem is that the fandom's privacy ideals are not good for it's reputation and public image, and therefor is not healthy for it since that is driving away potential fans. If the internet was more popular when anime (for example) was in the same age stage of development as furry then it, too, would have suffered a sex-centered taboo period. Once it went mainstream, the sexual deviancy contained therein did not matter. My point is, we need to do all we can to keep furry from seeming to drown in smut, and that means we need not bring to much attention to the socially unacceptable parts of the fandom in order for potential fans to be less reluctant to "join".

Your rating: None Average: 4 (4 votes)

Sooo... are you guys (Not all) saying that people should censor there lives to avoid the hatred of society in order for only the non-taboo side of the Fandom to be accepted?

I find that sick, and very selfish to be honest if that's the case.. Especially when it's actually the public's fault for making the sexuality of it a taboo in the first, f*#king place. It's not our fault, it's basically the other way around, and ignoring that is the "unhealthy" one. It is clearly possible that those fans could of looked at there own hatred and figure things out.
The way some guys are suggesting on here, is a path to control. If we were to focus on being brave and perhaps teaching society a lesson for other people, there would be less control.

I kind of feel sad on what this has led too, which is why I kind of left this Fandom, sort of.
Even if this was just for now, I don't think it's still fair to say, "THIS" is the only way to make it work, because that probably isn't even possible due to the Freedom of this Fandom, the better way is to teach those "fans" something about the difference, and the rest of the world about it, fairly.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

I have sent a story to Flayrah that GreenReaper has not published yet about how there are 10 million people around the world who blame furries for the Spanish Inquisition, for starting World War II and killing six million Jews, and other evils.

Fred Patten

Your rating: None

Oh my god, really? Also, when was that? Maybe he should publish it in a "showing how ridiculous Society has become" way, just because of a "small" amount of the fandom... sex :O
Dear God, it's a good thing that when I started to think outside this Matrix, I became more aware.

By the way, I was "Yeah, no" in case anyone was lost here.

Diamond_Man.exe - Not real fursona
Science/Knowledge/Sense > Bias or Biased

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

Right now. My story is titled "Religion: Satan is a furry", submitted to Flayrah on October 28. I assume that it's near the top of the queue for publication. It is about the Happy Science religion which has a website and claims more than 10,000,000 parishioners around the world. One of its tenets is that Satan is a cat-man from the Magellanic Cloud who came to Earth (with God's okay) 400,000,000 years ago and has been causing all of the evils on Earth. Google on the Happy Science religion for their website for the full story.

Fred Patten

Your rating: None

The fear of "cat-man" reminds me of a similar fear over something about "Nibiruans" where (I think) there was a claim saying we came from Lion-Like people. Heh..

Anyway, the "Religion: Satan is a furry" sounds funny and probably something to easily ignore, but 10,million people sounds awful... Though if it was just talking about a single anthropomorphic like creature and didn't mention "Furries", or just "Anthropomorphics", then it could be a little misunderstanding. Unless they did mention those names or something about it... Either way, what a load of bull crap (From them), I have no idea how they been able to get so far with something like that. lol

Diamond_Man.exe - Not real fursona
Science/Knowledge/Sense > Bias or Biased

Your rating: None

Well, it's more complicated than that. According to Happy Science, humans evolved on Venus. God told them to migrate to Earth 400,000,000 years ago, and they were all set to come here in spaceships (forget for the moment that scientists say that humans evolved on Earth only 1 million years ago), when God or somebody noticed that Earth was full of dinosaurs. God was afraid that the dinos would eat the humans, so he told them to wait and ordered the cat-men from the Magellanic Cloud to come to Earth and kill the dinosaurs first. So now you know why the dinosaurs disappeared: they were hunted to extinction by furry big-game hunters from the Magellanic Cloud. Being a Japanese religion, the cat-men only had pointed mobile ears and a tail. Over time, they evolved to lose their ears and tails and became indistinguishable from the humans. I confess that I am unclear on the details of why Satan became immortal, went down and founded Hell at the center of Earth, and he and the growing crowd of lost souls have been influencing the humans on the surface to have wars and disease and jealousy and rage and stuff ever since.

I don't believe in laughing in someone's face at his religion -- particularly when I'm the only non-believer surrounded by true believers at one of their services -- but I don't think that I have ever struggled harder to keep a straight face. My story does not say anything about Happy Science's recent expansion into Uganda. Google on that. There is no doubt that Happy Science is growing faster than furry fandom is.

Fred Patten

Your rating: None

Well I was mainly referring if that guy keeps using it to cause "Furry is evil" or some other thing.
If a person is very serious I think, I probably may not laugh or something..

Diamond_Man.exe - Not real fursona
Science/Knowledge/Sense > Bias or Biased

Your rating: None

And God is a Lion and Jesus is the Lamb... Animal symbolism in religion isn't anything too new.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

Guy once tried to offend me by describing furry Christians as guys who "jack off to Wolf Jesus on the cross."

Whoah, whoah, whoah, that's just completely wrong, I responded.

Furry Jesus is a LION.

Your rating: None

Probably a troll that avoids "that one thing" which isn't even necessary to do as it's not even hurting anyone else to feed off that society fear thing that isn't even necessary too. :S

And heh.

Diamond_Man.exe - Not real fursona
Science/Knowledge/Sense > Bias or Biased

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

Trivia time-

My understanding of "Lion Jesus" is that it's more a poke at a character from "The Chronicals of Narnia: The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe". The actual religious text leans more on the Lamb http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamb_of_God

The irony about C.S. Lewis's choice to have a lion play his Jesus role-- Lions in the the Bible don't appear to actually tie in with Jesus, in fact they're mostly refereed to in negative connotations. (http://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Lions)

Especially telling is--

1 Peter 5:8
"Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour."

Not looking so good for lion Jesus.

Your rating: None Average: 1 (3 votes)

It more to that. One of the reference to Jesus is the lion of Judah. In Revelation 5:5. The reference is to that Jesus as the triumphant Lion go back to his lineage in line of the tribe a Judah; the symbol of the tribe of Judah is a Lion.

Revelation 5:1-5

English Standard Version (ESV)

5 Then I saw in the right hand of him who was seated on the throne a scroll written within and on the back, sealed with seven seals. 2 And I saw a mighty angel proclaiming with a loud voice, “Who is worthy to open the scroll and break its seals?” 3 And no one in heaven or on earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll or to look into it, 4 and I began to weep loudly because no one was found worthy to open the scroll or to look into it. 5 And one of the elders said to me, “Weep no more; behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has conquered, so that he can open the scroll and its seven seals.”
it something CS Lewis and us Christian furs had pick up on.

Your rating: None

Oh, I missed this the first time; the four Gospels are often represented in Christian art (not really actually based on anything in said Gospels) by three animals and a man. I can't remember which is which other than John's Jesus is an Eagle, but it's Lion as King, Oxen as Sacrifice, Man as, well, Man, and Eagle as God (each of the four Gospels accentuates one of those aspects of Jesus).

Your rating: None

Or you mean "other animal symbolism"?, anyway I think this is more of a UFO Galactic theory rather than the Jesus religion theory. The idea that other planets had a different race. Also some theory suggesting that historic "symbolism" was connected to some alien thing.
In fact, it seems more interesting than the so called alien theory claiming that EVERY alien looks like a human or a too similar guy, that one is getting old to me. As one of those fans.
I'm kind of a UFO or that galactic fan btw. :P

EDIT: I think I get it though, as I respect religion believes of "Where we came from" or "Who came", if there is someone who believes we came from a Lion Jesus (It's more interesting than others to me because of that website I been too) then I will respect that religion too, hell due to reality theories and others, I could say we came from Celestia for all I care heh.

Diamond_Man.exe - Not real fursona
Science/Knowledge/Sense > Bias or Biased

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

Everything you said x 2.

DaryxFox speaks of taboo sex "driving away potential fans". No, I'll bet you anything furry porn has exploded the amount of furry fans. Like porn did for the internet itself.

It may be interest that people keep private because it's taboo. It might not encourage deep commitment. But it makes a context for it. Many furry fans grew lasting interest after being drawn that way.

DaryxFox says "we need not bring too much attention to the socially unacceptable parts of the fandom".

Let's do the opposite, and be comfortable treating people like grown-ups who can manage themselves, and don't need to have their standards managed for them. The normative view of "obscenity" has no objective measurement. It's for control. Don't give it to them. Celebrate weirdness and let your freak flag fly. It's part of humanity, as old as the god Pan with his goat's legs.

When pornography came out as a legitimate industry in the 1960's, it was part of social change that blew away the restrictions of the 1950's. It came with civil rights and LGBT acceptance. Of course it was business, with more hedonism than idealism, but there are documentaries about the role of porn as a harbinger of freedom.

I love the blogger who wrote, "the internet was the Chixulub asteroid for anti-porn activists." (the reason dinosaurs went extinct.) People no longer realistically think it will go away. Let's be that way too.

Ignore haters at least. Or be more radical, and queer the morals of uptight sourpusses. Society should do less moralizing. People should have more fun and sex, and care about it less. Shaming and fundamentalism is evil.

Your rating: None

I agree with the bits about less moralizing and having fun, but caring about it less? No, I disagree with that. (Edit: Definitely care less about people trying to make you feel bad about who you are; but don't care less about how you treat people in general.) I believe we need to care and show compassion towards others. If we're doing something that upsets someone else's tolerances, we don't have to give in to them - but we need to find balance points (note the plural). It's about showing and building respect, in both directions.

Ultimately the debate boils down to three basic issues: (1) Differing concepts of what the fandom means to its individual participants, (2) The age-old paradox of how does a tolerant person deal with the less tolerant, and (3) The difficulty of controlling what we want to see on the Internet.

Where does one draw the line? That's a trick question. It implies there's only one line - a definable point where we can say that behavior X must stop. Similarly, saying there should be no line, no limit, that we shouldn't care, becomes impractical - it's important to show that we can appreciate different people's comfort levels. Give people an advance warning about potential squickiness, and we gain respect.

Social encounters are best evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Are we hanging out in a public venue, a private one, or something between the two? Who am I with? What level of behavior can they tolerate? Do I care? -- Of course, if what the fandom means to someone is "I want to escape from having to worry about this sort of thing, and do what I want," then behavior becomes a problem. Similarly, if the place we're hanging out is virtual, i.e., on the Internet, we can't possibly control for the varying tolerance levels of complete strangers who could surf by at any given moment. No easy solutions to this, alas, except to give an advance indication of what sort of virtual space someone is about to enter, and even then, they might surf right by the signs without noticing them.

It can seem daunting sometimes to figure out where the current balance points are, especially if someone's not good at reading social cues, but actually it's not too hard with a little mental effort. The best example: Furry conventions! All sorts of people with varying interests and different levels of tolerance, all having a great time in the same place, respecting the less tolerant needs of the hotel, and we pull this off without fights breaking out! And if someone *does* cross one of the possible, meandering lines, security will have a quick word with them. :)

And we switch gears on our behavior all the time, and it's so automatic, we barely think about it. The way we behave on a bus is different than how we behave in a bedroom. We behave differently when our parents are around. We behave one way with one group of friends, and differently with another group of friends. When we're sitting in a food court vs. in a formal restaurant. When we're sitting in a classroom vs. standing in the hall outside the classroom. When we're in a hotel at a furry convention vs. walking down the street. Evaluating our behavior in the context of where we are at any given time, that's a constant element of life. There are times and places when it's better to express our inner selves than others. Part of the appeal of a fandom is to build more times and places for fans to express themselves more freely. But not all places within the fandom are the best places to express everything and anything, all the time.

Caring is important. The fandom's reputation grew from a combination of people failing to judge (or care about) the right time and place, plus the early days of the Web suddenly removing a lot of barriers before social (in)tolerance got better at dealing with it, plus trolls advertizing our most extreme members.

The more respect we show to others, the more respect we'll receive in return. I will shame anyone I think is acting in a stupid, self-absorbed manner, if the time and place for such behavior isn't appropriate. Furry fandom is at a point where the trolling isn't so bad anymore, other fandoms are cutting us a lot more slack, and expressing one's nerdiness has become an acceptable part of popular culture. It's like we've had a jerk-ass older brother constantly teasing us, but now that we're getting a bit older, he's easing off, seeing what kind of person we're going to grow into. Let's not waste the opportunity. :)

Your rating: None Average: 1.8 (4 votes)

You're missing the point. Just because furry porn is attracting more so-called "fans" doesn't mean that it's not driving away potential non sexually deviant fans. "Society should do less moralizing." You should do less stating your opinion as fact...

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

That leads to two questions: "which brings in more?" and "which do we want more of?" :-)

In practice it appears the level of discussion of pornography in furry fandom is one reason for a lower participation of women vs. men. But it also seems true that pornography has brought in a significant number of people, some of whom stay for the community aspects.

Your rating: None

Well that is clearly there fault for choosing to whine about it and leave. Instead, we should be offering them steps to ignore it and realize it exist in culture and that it's kind of everywhere, kind of. They could clearly find rooms without the porn or even non-porn "sexy attraction" and leave the other public areas be. Or if it's just stuck, tell them to ignore it still. (Like how I had to ignore things)
There was this Alpha and Omega fan of something one time, complaining that a little porn of it he just happened to find somewhere has "ruined" his own journey about it, so after "face-palming" a lot, I told him that it was clearly his fault for going there or choosing not to ignore it. Before I told him a dozen times, he kept *bitching* about new news based on his so called "awful" experience. I get it, your (Him/Her) not into something others happen to like, so just ignore it. lol This was in some news area talking about some sequel and trailer.

So trying to defend them aka work for them instead of the less control brave idea is what I thought to be, kind of feeding off a selfish idea.

"You should do less stating your opinion as fact..."
So people can't offer ideas that is actually necessary? What people do these days (The bad censorship) is based on stupid sh***y opinions that is being forced on people, and what he/she suggesting is less opinion, more for something that can actually be real.
Yes, society should be less moralizing because it has caused a ton of problems.

Diamond_Man.exe - Not real fursona
Science/Knowledge/Sense > Bias or Biased

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

This has been the most sensible thing I've read this entire article.

Your rating: None

But what of Weird Al? Are now are going to have to look at him in a different light?

Your rating: None

Also, I would like to thank GreenReaper for struggling through this mess.

Well, I'll be...

Your rating: None Average: 3.5 (12 votes)

Well, you're actually kind of the opposite of the Burned Furs; they drug the bad stuff out into the limelight, while you want to hide it.

We're a news site; I'm sorry we report the friggin' news (well, some of us do; I mostly just review kid's cartoons and retype stuff other people already wrote, but whatever). People will hate us because they can; we're not a race, religion, handicap or sexual orientation, all things people are not allowed to hate in modern life (not that that's a bad thing, of course). So, people hate things like emos or hipsters or furries now. Things that are choices that the individuals made. And some of the choices emos and hipsters and, yes, furries, make are, to be perfectly honest, completely (or at least fairly) hatable. And I'm not talking about outliers like "crazy cat boinker" or "so what's the big deal about pedophilic art guys" (though, duh, it's completely understandable why those guys get hated), I'm talking about you and me.

As a pretty clean furry, I have made some choices that are hatable; for instance, I am a 27 year old man who has spent a lot of time, money and effort into writing about children's television programming. Is it fair that someone hate me for that? Perhaps not fair, but is it understandable? I'd say yes; at the very least you could make the argument that my love of children's cartoons shows a lack of maturity, a trait that, let's face it, is at least worth a lack of respect, if not outright hatred, and that, furthermore, I can't really argue that the people who believe I am immature in their assessment of me are wrong.

What I'm saying is, well, haters gonna hate, but with the addendum that maybe it's okay for them to hate us. I'm a journalist; I believe strongly in telling the truth. If we don't tell the truth, people will very reasonably add dishonesty to their list of reasons they hate us.

And, finally, that's why I went on that rant about a month ago (Mister Twister, you probably missed it, but a couple of people will remember); when I say everybody hates furries, I don't really see that as a bad thing. Hatred is a strong emotion; people enjoy strong emotions. It's like why I keep ranting about movies like Ratatouille, Avatar and Prometheus; I love to hate those movies. The main argument against "everybody hates furries" was "nobody cares about furries," which, as I pointed out, is much worse than being hated. Because at least being hated is something.

So, seriously, stop worrying about being hated; first of all, we've all done things, furry or not, where, if we were completely honest with ourselves, we deserve to be hated for. Second of all, I mean, isn't it kind of fun to be the bad guy? Why shouldn't we "freak the normals"? Sometimes, the normals like being freaked. Isn't that the entire purpose of Halloween?

And I suppose that's a bit of an immature position to hold, but, well, duh.

Your rating: None Average: 1 (1 vote)

There's a difference between being childish and being churlish both fall under the umbrella of the word "immature". I'd rather be the former than the later.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

And some people would rather hate you for the former, the latter, both, your misspelling of the word "latter" or whatever.

Beside the point, Sonious, beside the point.

Your rating: None Average: 4 (1 vote)

Doesn't matter how successful you are. There are always going to be naysayers and negative people. One of the disappointments of success. "I can't really argue that the people who believe I am immature in their assessment of me are wrong." So you are agreeing with them that you are immature.
No thanks I can just as well hate those that hate me for superfluous reasons. If someone can't see the bigger picture, keep life in perspective, that maybe there are more important things then being bothered by the reasons I tug my dick or the things I choose to stick my dick into that are inanimate or consenting. To hell with those people, they are ants to me.

Your rating: None

Well changing a negative main view from "Society" to a less negative view based on bigoted/hatred thoughts is possible, like how mad society was from frowning against gays for no real reason. Or Racist, and other moments. It just takes more people to stand up for there own selves (Not a big fan of "Oh that's just a "small" minority of this" though as those people should not be frowned either.).
At least there is always the Law of Attraction theory... Of course, there may be little people still for now, but it's way better for life of the main world.

Outside of anything:
As for being hated, sorry but the "Hating furry" thing is actually harmful and very offensive and unfairly effects an environment; effecting carriers, lifestyle (Is this the right word?), having people to keep secret to avoid shit about other people's negative crap, being labeled as "waste" or "not", or anything while for example: A Furry believes his experience may be something spiritual, a style of Orientation, or anything the person him/her self has a right to believe in.
Labeling is awful by the way most of the time I think. Even labels them self can cause a lot of unfair thinking about others like "normal" for example. (So while people effect the same old air with that shitty belief, I will try to spread out that either "normal" is based on personality or "normal" just doesn't exist)
Yet, there are probably other crap.

The huge effects isn't simply a dust in the air that I and some other furries could ignore, it's basically ACID in the air all over the damn place. I don't know if this is as bad as being frown upon for being Gay but due to how screwed up everything is, a personal experience is often custom (Worse than the other for each person) so it can be worse, sometimes not. Same with some public expressing.
Some furries probably don't care, but there are those who do, and wants to be treated as "normal" instead of remaining in the damn darkness to hide so called "shame" especially the so called "dark" interest (Dark is just a stupid label over something based on too many forcing biased thoughts)

Oh and: "People will hate us because they can; we're not a race, religion, handicap or sexual orientation," This "we" isn't all of us. I think it's awful to separate "furry" from things like "religion", "handicap", or even "sexual orientation" because of like I said more above. If society can hate "us" just because they can, then I argue they can do the same thing to all others as well.
Oh and Furry isn't really a choice to a lot. I can't change what I like and there is a ton of lacking science the even prove what lot's people been labeling.

"and that, furthermore, I can't really argue that the people who believe I am immature in their assessment of me are wrong. " Actually you can argue there belief of what "mature" even is. Or even another thing. Even all of hatred crap can be argued or change since it's rotten understandable all the time.

Sorry for writing too much again, but this whole "not possible" "any respect against hatred" without thinking around this just, bothers me a lot.

Diamond_Man.exe - Not real fursona
Science/Knowledge/Sense > Bias or Biased

Your rating: None

Hate doesn't come from nowhere, but where it does come from I think is one of the most misunderstood things in our society. It's a bunch of complex variables.

From what I have seen though it typically spawns from one of two things

1) Someone was (or feels they were) wronged by someone.
2) Someone fears someone will take something they hold dear away from them.

This hate relation can be a single person to a single person, a single person to a group, or a group to a group. It can go one way or both ways.

The interesting part though is that "I'll hate people who hate" is actually following the "Golden Rule" a pretty popular morale code. Instead I personally upgrade to the "Platinum Rule" which is treat other better than you expect treat yourself. This has worked because there are people out there who react to the same sets of stimuli different then I do, and because of this it's important to learn why they feel the way about things they do than to shove them off.

Of course, there are those who become so wrapped up in it that'd probably kill you then speak with you. The fact is everyone was born of this world with someone hating them. For some family out there doesn't care for yours, or a foreigner hates you because you were born in a particular geographic location. So one must always understand if their goal is to not be hated by anyone, than you must be known by no one and must have no identity.

Your rating: None Average: 1 (1 vote)

You're talking about hatred based on something you have no control over; the point that needs to be made is that some of the things furries are hated for are things furries have control over. For instance, the guy who fucked the cat had no control over whether or not he fucked the cat, while I had no control over that situation. If someone decides to hate all furries for this man's actions, well, I am being hated for something I have no control over, and that's not really fair.

However, as I pointed out (back in August, because CraftyAndy can't be bothered to read time stamps), I have made choices that can come under fire; namely, the choice to continue watching and reviewing children's cartoons. This seems harmless enough, but I suppose it could be argued that the time and money I spend watching cartoons is wasted time; I'm certainly not improving the world, and even I can barely argue I'm improving myself (I will flatter myself it improves my critical acumen, however).

But my point is, I made a choice; whether or not the hatred for that choice is completely justified is beside the point, because choices have consequences, and one of those consequences can be hatred. And that's the problem I see a lot in furries; the refusal to accept any consequences for their actions. You cannot eat your cake and have it too.

I accept the hatred; it may not be justified, but I still say it is fair. To be a furry is to be hated, because to be a furry is to make a choice. Why I don't like talk of "furry isn't a choice"; it's just another attempt to dodge the consequences of being a furry, and it's cowardly. Even more cowardly, in my opinion, than someone who likes cartoon animals and decides not to be a furry, because at least that person has considered the consequences.

One of my favorite horror story heroes is Mr. Utterson from the original Jekyll and Hyde by Robert Lewis Stevenson; you've probably never heard of the character, because he is a bit boring. He likes the theater, for instance, but he doesn't go to the theater, because he lives in the Victorian era and it was weird. He'd be socially maligned for going to theater. Meanwhile, Jekyll likes the theater, so he invents a potion that changes the way he looks, and now he can go to the theater without consequence (or so he thinks). Now, obviously, going to the theater is no big thing, so if there was a third character who went to the theater unashamedly, good for him, and he'd be the hero, honestly (in this metaphor, he's the furry).

But, since there isn't someone like this, we have a man that acknowledges the consequences, and a man who tries to dodge the consequences. And that is why Mr. Utterson is the hero, and Dr. Jekyll (and not Mr. Hyde, who is really nothing more than a really good disguise) is the villain.

Your rating: None

To be honest, you are pretty much controlled by the way the corrupt world pretty much works instead of the belief that you can actually argue by standing up or something.
You ignore it, and believe that hiding what you are (Unless what you are is already currently accepted) is the only way to avoid consequences (As one example).

Someone could argue that watching a children's show can be a waste of time, but since your life is not there's, then they are wrong about you, unless you believe this personality (By wanting to help others by donation or other) your self. Even this whole "helping" others thing is also belief and all. There, that's one argument against there own claim, and there can be many more.
Same thing with that cat, there were some Zoo arguments around I heard.
"If someone decides to hate all furries for this man's actions, well, I am being hated for something I have no control over, and that's not really fair."
Like I said, this is society's fault, as they could be taught many things. It isn't fair to blame some random guy over something (That even is also arguable) and not blame the other world that they could be less narrow about and less hatred about.

Hatred is a choice "too", and people can naturally change it.
Hell, watching a show based on your interest is more uncontrollable than hatred as your watching it based on your own interest it's self you probably can not changed. Hatred is often based on random opinions, or personal taste, even personal taste could be controlled by keeping it to them selves. Personal interest isn't necessary to keep unless one wants to: regardless of what people think.

"Why I don't like talk of "furry isn't a choice"; it's just another attempt to dodge the consequences of being a furry, and it's cowardly."
Then religion is the same, same with gay, hetero, etc. Because this has pretty much the same damn story, but that's often not the case (That there is plenty of warnings if expressed) for a lot because of what people did in the past, you know, that idea that you are not much of a fan of.

This consequence idea to blame that "Furry isn't a choice" to be cowardly is based on a delusion in that you think Society somehow are "born" with. No, Society is the coward, not the ones who refuse to accept hatred of them. I refuse the hatred of them, (The same feeling as having a religion or even orientation) and I'm proud that I did, ever since I did, I became more aware of this dumb little world.
That doesn't mean currently there isn't any unnatural consequences in some point, but that can change, and maybe even somehow dodge it at the now, and many more kinds of reasons.

Besides, why must one "not be born" in order to think it's "fine" to insult anyway? And yet, no-one is born a religion unless grew up with, but hey, I could be wrong, but why does it matter? Hatred should not be tolerated anyway. Not only that, but even if what I like does get accepted, I still would like to believe that "being born" with is still a neat personal thing.

I really don't want to sound insulting but ideas of yours and any others who has similar reasons is kind of why I just don't want to be known much in this fandom. I just basically like said: "Fuck it, I think I'm just on my own. I may have interest into anthropomorphic but I think it's more out of the box to not be trapped with people who keep spreading forcing opinions on what "furry" is, or other things." Is it worse than the way Brony fandom did? probably not... but this is pretty bad to be honest anyway.
Yeah yeah, long post and I might of said a couple of mis-info but I just wanted to point it out of in-case reasons and I'm tired.

Diamond_Man.exe - Not real fursona
Science/Knowledge/Sense > Bias or Biased

Your rating: None

Okay, first of all, you can't go a sentence without adding an awkward clause apologizing for the main clause of the sentence. Second of all, it's not like your sentence structure isn't awkward to begin with.

What I'm trying to say is I have no idea what you are trying to say. I'm not even sure we disagree, here.

Your rating: None

Your sentence structure is kind of the same in another sense I think...

I said "sorry" that I "write" a lot as I try to get into detail a lot I think,
second, your idea was that you just accept what other people think of you and attacking any furry who wants to stop all harmful drama over there own lives, who believes there own experience in some way (Even some part of Sexual orientation to some, hard to explain), or other personal thoughts. Also, pretending that hatred from society "isn't" a big deal; with the belief saying that they are "not" wrong, can't argue, giving up, etc.
Third, I was basically arguing against some ideas you thought about "furry", and other people. (Like example, the idea of why some people hate them, claiming that if it's understandable, you somehow can't reasonably argue against it, and no that's not only it, same goes with "born" theory, choices, whatever)

If you want to be accepted this way by other people, that's fine but to me, I will gladly argue against what people think of me, and for others or some whether haters like it or not.

If you don't understand me still, then forget it I guess.

Diamond_Man.exe - Not real fursona
Science/Knowledge/Sense > Bias or Biased

Your rating: None

At least you didn't apologize that much that time.

I'm not sure this is a good place to reasonably argue against furry "haters," since we're all furries here. You can't argue against haters if you're not arguing with haters. This is what I mean when I say I don't think we're not even on the same side.

I'm not arguing against dialogue against furry haters; rather the opposite, in fact. I agree you can reasonably argue with haters. My point is that you have to at least understand where they are coming from; it is a common furry argument that "haters" (wish we were using another word, but whatever) cannot be argued with because they bring nothing of value to the conversation.

I'm just saying haters have valid reasons for their hate; calling them "ants that beneath me" (like CraftyAndy did) is unfair, wrong, and also kind of a dick move. The answer to hate shouldn't be more hate.

Your rating: None

Actually you can argue against haters too, as it's not necessary to use the "with" theory in order for things to work. I do however understand what you mean under your idea I think, but I'm talking about the biased and ignore arguments as well, example: "Gay is wrong, because I think it's gross" "Umm, that's your personal thought (Though I can offer maybe) but I will say, it's not true to the world because others are not you, and you should keep un-true effects to your self.. hmm?"
Or we should just ignore the guy with the un-true effects and just embrace it without even having to argue against it, with our own meanings, because you don't need to argue with him in order for some things to happen.

I seen similar things "against haters" with gay rights and others and the morons just stayed more hidden (The anti-gay people).
"bring nothing of value to the conversation" I seen a lot of values with the "against" theory and even "with", I think it can work if some wants to try, especially since a lot of furries has had there lives more pushed around and crap based on the "un-true" effects.

If you mean "valid" as in a "reason" exist regardless on if it's a dumb, biased, or fear reason, or if it's good reason then you make your point (Every hatred crap going on, including hatred against gays, blacks, jews, etc...) but I disagree that it's "unfair" to "hate back" because honestly I don't see a point not too, well I mean, you don't have to but hating back is not going to cause anything worse most of the time maybe.
(Also regardless on what reason people has on furries, is still a dick move too regardless on why due to what's already proven I think)
It's the same with gays, some people seem to accept the hatred against people who use hatred based on bible theories, some call them "religious freak", but that didn't make people continue making things worse, it's basically a reaction to a possible reaction from hatred; sometimes saying it in a "how do you like it way".
It's kind of a point of "shaming them back".
There are some people who can't control there hatred of things existing in public, the only argument I would have if I just couldn't "hate back" is to say "You have to get over it, you don't own the public".

So what he did was reacting a unfair move to bring more unfair back to them. (Fuck off haters is like that but in a leave my life alone thing too)
"No thanks I can just as well hate those that hate me for superfluous reasons."
It's true you know, if hate did not exist in the first place, then there would be no reason to hate "back" as that may be the only thing unfair. I honestly don't see how it's "unfair" for him to say that as a reaction. It makes me think that just because haters could have biased or some "real" argument based, there reason is somehow more "fair".

Diamond_Man.exe - Not real fursona
Science/Knowledge/Sense > Bias or Biased

Your rating: None

Of course, it's based on a lot of things, but you can argue them of course and though some are based on just plain personal uncontrollable (Can't learn to keep to them selves) taste. Maybe even nothing but that might be more rare.
It does remind me of the anti-gay thing, there are some people who just teaches that there wasn't anything wrong with Gay while ignoring people's religious ways: by just directing attacking the beliefs (Keep religion based arguments to selves, or something), but there are also those who argue in religion, finding proof that the bible wasn't talking about homosexuality, or anything about it. Yet, even more possible ways to argue since there are lot's of possibilities.

"So one must always understand if their goal is to not be hated by anyone, than you must be known by no one and must have no identity." Not sure if you mean "then" instead of "than", are you suggesting that a person who may be hated should hide them selves instead of standing up with the possibility of good change?

Diamond_Man.exe - Not real fursona
Science/Knowledge/Sense > Bias or Biased

Your rating: None Average: 3 (2 votes)

True, any idiot can recognize immaturity in another; I didn't say these people were 100% correct. I just don't see them as 100% wrong, either. However, to recognize immaturity in yourself is a good first step towards maturity. I can not address a problem I am not aware of, after all.

Besides, rejecting criticism on the grounds that "I'm pretty fucking awesome, and you people fucking suck!" (to paraphrase your last paragraph) kind of makes you a prick.

Edit: In reply to CraftyAndy; threading may make that unclear. Just so everyone knows exactly who and who not I am calling a prick.

Your rating: None Average: 4 (4 votes)

We could get into examining why it's futile to try to re-define something as "not furry" through ignoring it, why "creepy" is a feelings-based label with no meaning because nobody claims it for themselves, and why "private" and "disturbing" are likewise personal judgements that don't have more value than anyone else's standards in free and open discussion. But those things are all made moot by this:

Does furry fandom need to recruit? Is this an army, a business or a religion? No, it's a hobby. It reflects the complex and unlimited personal interests of anyone who chooses the label. Who cares if some people are too oversensitive for it?

You CAN keep your hobby to yourself BTW, and avoid choosing to make yourself feel in conflict with society. So, if we're talking about keeping private things private-the feeling reflects back on the feeler first of all, and other people's business is secondary. If you feel uncomfortable with associating with other furry fans, don't call yourself one in public. That's how it is when there's no membership commitee or gatekeeper approving who's in, and it's a very good thing there isn't.

Of course there are good reasons to think about image and common courtesy and being nice to each other, and all that hippie stuff that comes with a community. Also it's not unreasonable or negative to be selective about how or whether you associate with furries. When i can, i help art students to separate hobby and professional image. But usually when i meet one who i can tell is into furry art, i dont let them know i know, to respect their privacy unless they choose to bring it up. Otherwise i'm their professionally secret ally they dont know they have.

Your rating: None Average: 3.3 (3 votes)

Does furry fandom need to recruit? Is this an army, a business or a religion? No, it's a hobby.

I don't know . . . "Furries: We Recruit" has a nice ring to it, don't you think? ;-)

Your rating: None Average: 4 (4 votes)

Shhh... keep it on the down-low, or they might find out we powder our fursuits with cat pheromones and designer drugs, and mix secret backwards messages praising satan, gay sex, and Disney merchandise in our furry con rave music!

Your rating: None Average: 4 (8 votes)

Mike Godwin said, "The First Amendment was designed to protect offensive speech, because nobody ever tries to ban the other kind."

The Fourth Estate is founded on a related principle, that the "offensiveness" of a story isn't what's important, but rather its *truth*.

If this site reported only the happy and fuzzy, it would be of less value. Now, propaganda has its place: it entertains, advocates, and unifies. But we already have venues that fulfill those functions. The function that's needed -- and that Flayrah admirably fills -- is *news*.

Real news validates a market. It follows the unthinking lovers and haters, the reactionaries, and the clowns. It shows that a subject has depth, is worth talking about. It's a sign of maturity. And its irreplaceable.

[For the record, I've worked alternatingly in news media and public relations for about fifteen years. My portfolio shows some of my recent pieces in both.]

Your rating: None Average: 2.6 (7 votes)

That's another point Tom brings up; Mister Twister, Draconis and Xydexx's point (and I freely admit I'm calling these people ou to shame the) seems to be "when something bad happens, lie about it".

You don't have to be a trained journalist to see the problems with that line of thinking. My take is even if some stories are actively harmful, it is ethically wrong to not report them; a lie of ommission is still a lie.

Your rating: None

For the record, I don't think the original post needs shaming.

The question of what news to promote (and which to bury) is made on a case-by-case basis at every news outlet. It's a judgment call; Mister Twister says he'd make different choices from Flayrah's staff. Well and good. I'm sure the staff has killed stories for various reasons, and will continue to do so in the future.

Your rating: None Average: 3.7 (3 votes)

I have a feeling that the standard to kill a story makes it very unlikely. I've posted, like, crazy shit here. The only one Green has EVER killed from me was one that was completely redundant in every way, because all of the info in it was already covered by multiple articles posted here in the past. Because I was too dumb to do a search before I started writing. That was a fine reason not to publish it that I agreed with.

Here's an idea:

With the way furry activity seems to be growing and making more content (look at cons), I'd say it can justify creating "departments" like other news outlets have, and channel the info towards readers for clarity.

This place already prefaces stories with "opinion", "review" etc. (Not to mention tags.) For crime stories, label it the "Furry neighborhood watch" department. There's your positive explanation for why it's here.

As a side comment... I already brought up with Green the idea of "local bureaus". Like, I'd be putting a lot of news into the San Francisco Bay Area Furry bureau. Torfur = Toronto Furry. Etc. I'd browse them to see what's going on in other subcultural hot spots, where otherwise you don't get the info, unless you're dedicated to signing up to their mailing lists. There are tons of super active furbowls and such events springing up, and they don't know what each other is doing. I'd love to compare our local Fremont Furbowl to the Delaware Furbowl. Or Frolic to Foxtrot. You could send invites to local forums/lists and it would be up to locals to step up and volunteer to post what's going on with them.

Well, Green mentioned "editorial bandwidth" as maxed, but there's that idea anyways.

Your rating: None Average: 2.3 (3 votes)

I know there is a post from Green Reaper on Vivisector (of all places) where he admitted he had never turned down a story, with one exception; a submission to the now defunct Furtean Times that the submitter accidentally submitted to Flayrah. However, as that incident is from when the Furtean Times there may have been other stories GR killed since. (I'll post the link tonight when I'm on a real computer instead of my cell phone.)

Also, for all intents and purposes, Green Reaper is Flayrah's staff (mwalimu also does something, but you got me exactly what; mostly moderate, but this isn't a very mmoderated site). Me, Patch and Sonious like to pretend we have some kind of authority, but other than submitting storiesm we have no control over content.

I will say recently there was a slight kerfuffle over an action by the Anthrocon staff we never publicly reported on, but we were involved, and may not have been the best place to break that story.

Your rating: None Average: 2.3 (3 votes)

Actually, I'm glad you brought up the Anthrocon example. Flayrah's staff (or GreenReaper, if you prefer ;) ) has deliberately been silent on some points of that story. So there's definitely some editorial discrimination (the good kind) here.

Some parties think he was too vocal in posting that story -- and he's paid for it, personally. It's also a thorough, thoughtful, and well-researched story. I think it's a shining example of why good journalism is important -- even if it makes your friends look bad.

Your rating: None Average: 2 (4 votes)

Oh, that's a different example (though I was impressed enough to really start paying attention to Flayrah after that story, leading to my involvement with the site); I'm talking about something that happened this year that pretty much the regular Flayrah contributors and Anthrocon's staff know about; basically, it probably was a direct, if very belated, response to the lninked to article.

Replying to Patch, I have a story in the queue about the frequency of certain types of articles on Flayrha as well as other statistical tidbits; so you may have a decent, and public, place to talk about that sort of thing wothout the inevitable drama of this storiy's comments.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (6 votes)

What crossaffliction is edging around is Anthrocon's decision to deny me a table in the Dealers' Den this year, based in part on "the discomfort of our organization with your personal news media focus on our convention in the past, and concern over your personal news media focus in the future."

I quickly realized that, unlike the sale of commercial products, merely giving away fliers was permitted throughout convention space. So I printed 10,000 fliers and did just that. Ultimately this was a lot more effective than sitting at a table, if a little time-consuming – I reached ~85% of attendees.

If Anthrocon's board has qualms about Flayrah's output, their concerns are not necessarily shared by their staff, who (without solicitation) asked me for fliers to distribute from their working areas on three separate instances.

From a journalistic perspective, what I should probably also have done would be post the above as a story on April Fools; but, alas, I had more pressing matters to attend to. The irony is both dealers' staff and I were so busy that we never got around to discussing future years. Perhaps at MFF!

If you joined Flayrah as a result of that story, I can hardly complain about any fallout, given your contributions since then.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

Good job :) I even have one hanging out in my wallet! If I, uh, need a reminder to post more.

Your rating: None

Yeah, it was never brought up anywhere else, and I never saw a consensus, so I of course blundered in and then realized, "oh, umm, I don't know if I'm supposed to talk about this ..."

Your rating: None Average: 3 (2 votes)

Note I joined the same day cross did.

Mainly because I was young, foolish, and there was a roo involved... but he was more a wolf in roo clothing. Literally.

Your rating: None

>>Anthrocon's decision to deny me a table in the Dealers' Den this year, based in part on "the discomfort of our organization with your personal news media focus on our convention in the past, and concern over your personal news media focus in the future."

?! wow woah wait, back up. Is this a story metaphor I missed somehow, or did this event occurred?

Your rating: None

Not really a metaphor, no.

The story really did leave a sour taste in AC's mouth even if it was mostly harmless in the grand scheme of things. I recall GreenReaper had removed himself from staff before posting that story.

Ironically I think that story did them a bit of a favor because now people who are furries who are pro-gun know they bring their firearm to Pittsburgh (even if OFF convention grounds) at great risk to their future membership. Information a con chair, I think, would WANT their attendees to know, even if in an unofficial capacity.

One person being banned because he didn't know of these kind of consequences is enough I'd say.

I don't begrudge them the right to decide to not have us in the dealer's den in a recognized capacity. It's their right as a con, and they are doing quite well for themselves. I'm sure such a decision wasn't as controversial as the Bad Dragon one, lol. MFF would be fine by me. Having Fur'the More and MFF be my two yearly cons would give it good spacing and free up my summer for other things.

Though I have been to MFF once, and I especially like that it's easy for me to get to transportation wise (train+subway almost after only a few minute drive to station), the time I went in 2011, I didn't really DO much... I was alone at the con basically. Too many of my friends were busybodies that were there. Didn't have my sister to converse with as with AC, didn't have furry friends that were freed up. Had my own room. So it was a meh experience.

Maybe not this year though, I am spending my money saved from not going to AC on a partial suit.

Your rating: None Average: 2.8 (4 votes)

Yes, this occurred; for a group concerned with a news source possibly tainting there reputation, they were disarmingly honest about there reasons for not allowing Green Reaper a table, especially when they could have just pointed out that, technically, GR didn't need a Dealer's table since he had nothing to sell.

Green Reaper can attest that I was sending him paranoid emails moments before Anthrocon began betting he wouldn't even be allowed to pass out the fliers; at least I was wrong there.

Personally, I thought the story of this happening should've gone out there, but I also personally thought that was Green Reaper's call, and feel like I manipulated this thread into making him finally put it out there; so, I'm both sorry I brought it up and not sorry I brought it up.

Your rating: None Average: 3.7 (3 votes)

I was critical of that decision at the time, but as time goes on and I look at all the possible variables I have altered my position a bit.

My though was it was purely Ross V. Kage at the time, but decisions like these don't happen in a bubble, I'm sure the relations with Pittsburgh had some influence over the decision. Worries about the city being concerned about the safety of its citizenry because of pro-gun furs. Worries about furries being searched more often, or of more police getting involved over regulating the con. These are all possibilities which I didn't consider when making the original assessment.

If the decision was deciding to sacrifice the one fur who caused a stink to save face with the hosting city, I'd be hard pressed to say it was a wrong call. Having one fan lose access to one of many furry conventions is not as hard on the fandom as an entire convention losing a city.

Your rating: None Average: 2.6 (10 votes)

The funny thing is, I always thought this was the reason Xydexx had the guns out for Flayrah in general and Green Reaper in particular was this story. It makes sense; Green Reaper reporting on something Anthrocon (an organization Xydexx still works with, and Green Reaper had a vague connection with before this story) did not want reported on, whether or not it was the right thing to do, probably seemed like a betrayal, even personal. Okay, I didn't agree with it, but it makes sense if you actually try to take his view.

However (and I can't back this up, since Xydexx deletes his blog like the paranoid guy he is), it turns out his grudge against Green Reaper is based on GR refusing to take his side in a public slap fight he and another balloon fetishist had about the correct way to jack off to balloons. (It apparently got moved: http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/Talk:Inflation This is the end result. I'm not a very good "drama" guy; my Google Fu is weak).

Your rating: None Average: 2.3 (3 votes)

Little of column A, little of column B

Your rating: None Average: 2 (4 votes)

Also, probably just a lot of column C ... for Crazy.

Your rating: None Average: 2 (4 votes)

As much as he's, I do kind of enjoy our exchanges. They by far are the most challenging and his responses are always the most surprising, which is a hard thing to accomplish for me who has heard many variations.

Your rating: None Average: 2.8 (4 votes)

The Vivisector link:

https://forums.vivisector.org/index.php?topic=474.msg4852#msg4852

I'll just quote GreenReaper:

"When a story is published on Flayrah it's primarily because its author thought the topic was worth noting. I don't go around assigning stories, nor do I exercise a heavy hand over topics.

Certainly, I consider a story's tone and suitability for the omelette. But the fact is, having to register and write a coherent story in news style is sufficient to deter most unsuitable stories.

I can recall only one time that I refused a submitted story for being in the wrong place, and that's because it belonged on another furry news site, along with the stories it was responding to. It ended up on Flayrah anyway when that site closed."

So, Patch says he got one blammed, but then again he says it was redundancy rather being off topic; really, this whole discussion is kinda pointless, because GR's policy is "everything goes". If Higgs keeps submitting them, he'll keep posting them, and everyone will continue whining, but unless they start their own furry news site (spoiler alert: they won't), nothing will change.

And while we're on Vivisector, I forgot this case, where the contributor submitted a video but deleted it off YouTube and Flayrah himself; basically, a case of a teenager being a teenager.

https://forums.vivisector.org/index.php?topic=649.msg7169;topicseen#msg7169

I asked Green Reaper about it, and since Vivisector is mostly just "FA did something" these days, he hardly even bothers lurking there anymore, so he claimed this was the first he knew about it (seeing as how it was probably responsible for Kyell Gold's withdrawal from the Ursa Majors, it was a pretty big thing that just kind of got ignored by everyone).

Finally, and apropos of nothing, I saw a fox on the way home from work tonight.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (2 votes)

The submission of the Furtean Times commentary was not an accident. I suggested that the submitter should at least try to post it there first, which they did - and, to that publication's credit, the debate remained there. If it had not, I would have published their piece.

The main reason I take a back-seat when it comes to selecting stories is that Flayrah is not intended to represent my view, but that of the whole fandom. It is community, civic, collaborative and citizen journalism.

Your rating: None

Which is why you posted that Healthcare thing right?

Your rating: None

It's why I posted the responses to it as well.

Your rating: None Average: 4 (1 vote)

Well, first of all I am not shamed by anything I have submitted so far. I would like you to understand when you have to talk to non attendees about the furry fandom and the negative parts of it, it makes it difficult to get people to understand, that the actions of some are not the actions of all.
Now due to the actions of some, there are furry cons that cannot happen in some cities. They have to relocate to somewhere else. I understand that there is a lot that goes on in the fandom. I do not believe we have to announce it to the world is all. There are negative stories carried in newspapers or online. We are not the ones who are telling lies if we don't promote them. Let someone else find them. Let people find these stories on their own.
I find stories like this demoralizing. Is that the goal of Flayrah? I remember the motto of Flayrah was "good News" or something like that. I think the writers who submit stories here have forgotten that. They want their 5 stars I am guessing

Your rating: None Average: 1.4 (5 votes)

Look, dude, the furry fandom's bad reputation is approximately three decades in the making; I don't know what you're worried about. The "Google thinks you're naughty" thing didn't happen overnight. So maybe because of the kitty-diddler article, some guy who already thinks all furries screw animals thinks ... I don't know, furries screw more animals? One story is just a drop in the ocean.

The truth is, if furries don't deserve their bad reputation, then it doesn't matter. On the other hand, if furries do deserve their bad reputation, it also doesn't matter. You're willing to lie and cover up for some douchebag who possibly killed a cat with his dick for something so inconsequential?

Your rating: None Average: 3.4 (5 votes)

It's actually quite easy to get five stars, or close to it, by posting "good news" [read: positive, good-feel stories]. Readers tend to vote up stories they like, and vote down those they don't. In-depth journalism sometimes works, but is less frequently written. Stories on controversial topics almost never get five stars, regardless of quality.

Flayrah's original motto was "unusually good information", playing off the meaning of the word in Watership Down. My reading is that this does not imply anything about the positivity of the reporting, but rather its quality.

To the extent possible, I intend for Flayrah to provide "the whole truth" about the fandom, without a bias towards positive or negative reporting. This means we will sometimes publish stories which might, say, cause people to think twice about going to a furry convention, just as we publish those which may encourage it. Few would respect a news site which only posted good news.

While we can't achieve a neutral point of view, our mix of stories and discussion aims to emulate it. Of course, any one contributor may choose to focus on stories of a particular sort. I also try to preserve the author's viewpoint while editing opinion pieces.

Your rating: None

Thanks Tom! Have a high-five paw for a good post.

Your rating: None Average: 1.8 (5 votes)

If *I* programmed the Google algorithm:

Furries...for Michele Bachmann 2012
...like gay sex but vote Republican
...call for Kent Hovind to be released from jail
...will beat you up in your own home but still get invited to host convention panels
...spend the money you donate them on commissions
...want you to fuck your housepets because that's what your housepets want, really
...think I'm going to willingly self-associate with these sorts of people
...yes, they are that naive (or just plain stupid)

Your rating: None Average: 5 (6 votes)

In taking with the above guy, but actually going to the Google and letting it autocomplete I got the following. Actual results by the way.

Blacks are...
...(rude)
...(the real Jews)
...(not fully human)

Christians are...
...(fake)
...(annoying)
...(wrong)

Jesus is...
...(just alright)
...(savior)
...(a jerk)

Americans are...
...(not stupid)
...(rude)
...(spoiled)
...(brainwashed)

Oh and don't forget:

Nerds are...
...(freaks too)

Looks like we're in good company in this virus called humanity... oh and those aren't my words either:

Humanity is...
...(doomed)
...(evil)
...(the devil)
...(a virus)

I'm starting to think Google is a negative nancy, what does Google think?

Google is...
...(evil)
...(your friend)
...(God)
...(better than Bing)

Guess the jury's still out on that one.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (4 votes)

Ooh, this is fun!!

Disney is…
- evil
- racist
- satanic
- bad for children

priests are…
- OP
- gay
- evil
- married to god
- pedos
- celibate
- hypocrites
- OP WoW

Gays are…
- destroying america
- born that way
- weird
- people too

aliens are…
- real
- demons
- from hell
- coming

Mr. Twister, how about an article about important issues we can learn from bathroom graffiti? (LOL not really, but future archeologists can do that...)

Your rating: None Average: 5 (4 votes)

I love this game.

Anime fans are...
- annoying
- losers
- ugly
- weird

Gamers are...
- losers
- idiots
- annoying
- entitled

Star Wars fans are...
- called
- stupid
- annoying
- whiny

Seems like google hates a lot of fandoms.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (3 votes)

Oh man, this whole comment thread just made my night. xD

Artists are...
weird
stupid
useless
the most dangerous

Your rating: None Average: 5 (4 votes)

Here's another one for you... oh you're going to love this last one...

Zelda fans are...
- the worst
- annoying
- stupid
- Twilight fans

--- I really don't think I've seen a greater insult for any other fandom. Zelda fan's win. We should through them a pity party :(

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

I think I had too much fun with this XD

FurAffinity is...
-down
-slow
-currently down
-offline

Bronies are...
-weird
-creepy
-stupid

Trekkies are...
-losers
-insane
-nerds
-hot

Your rating: None Average: 1 (2 votes)

well what makes them think furries are creepy? Is it rumors? Are they still kids in their teens? Did they have a bad experience?
How bout they get some balls and come to a convention or some meets. Furs are fans of their work regardless so they like what hate money or something?

Your rating: None Average: 3.8 (4 votes)

Well, on the bright side, Fred and I probably have avoided a handful of one stars thanks to this article. And this discussion, while annoying in its own right, is still both more interesting and less depressing than "what's wrong with screwing a cat?" Comments we were all dreading.

Your rating: None Average: 1.8 (12 votes)

There are two issues in this post. I disagree and find it very helpful such stories like the guy who was caught in the act of bestiality. I rather hear such stories on Flayrah than some troll site or twisted by the mainstream media.
The second is more troubling: the reputation we furries face and ramifications we seeing including persecution is due to those who are trying to make the fandom something that is not: gay, and not only gay, as 2 the ranting gryphon has sown, something that doesn’t reflect entirety of the LGBT culture, but a segment of radicalized Bay area activism. Over that months it I heard the same not just 2 but other gays inside and outside the fandom that the type of Bay Area lifestyle activism does not reflect their own LGBT lifestyle.
This.,brings me to the recent stories of the Russian Law, GaymerX , and SF Gay Pride is has comment thread of claims some kind of Gay and furry axis or natural allies is father from the truth. My concern is this the same problem a bay area fur started at Confurence by going to gay publication telling the furry fandom is a place to get in touch of one’s (kinky amoral) sexuality and the bad and unjust reputation it caused to the fury fandom; to this day we furs are have to face, even us who are furthest form the gay lifestyle (for me Reformed, theological orthodox, Christian). For example I often hang around a Christian furry board, there a young many when told his parent he is a furry the parents want to get him re baptized because they thought he had a demon. Now I am concern Further Confusion is repeating history with the same ramifications for the fandom.
Finally I would bring to light a story in Adjective Species Only 22% of Furries are Gay, so much for a claim of a Gay furry alliance or axis. Only a small involvement.

Your rating: None Average: 3.4 (15 votes)

It's just not a Flayrah debate until I have to figure out what language Acton is speaking.

Your rating: None Average: 2.6 (10 votes)

"Acton is on your ignore list" is much easier on the eyes than a paranoid word-salad about the evil gay conspiracy stealing his Hello Kitties, or whatever he's raving about in that closet.

Your rating: None Average: 2.5 (6 votes)

I kind of think he's adorable, actually.

Your rating: None Average: 4 (4 votes)

Maybe in the sense of a very slow child repeating a racist joke he doesn't comprehend, to a room full of extremely tolerant adults. Broken records get old fast though.

Your rating: None Average: 1.7 (9 votes)

Your opining dose not follow

When the entirety of person’s response to an argument is ad hominem,Non sequitur, or just criticizes grammar -- I win.

When a person decides the only recourse is not civil debate but to public proclaim you are going to ignore me –you do not have an argument and I win.

Pack rat your activism and involvement in the mainstream media (see Packrat response to Furlandia ) in my years of political involvement ( in the Republican Party) I know you the tactics all too well . I am not writing for your reading pleasure but to provide an alternative argument.
By the way many who question gay activism in the fandom are gay or bisexual

Your rating: None Average: 3.7 (6 votes)

Yes, Acton, you read the Wikipedia article for "debate" and learned about that "ad hominen" and "non sequitur" stuff, but most people learn about debating from actually debating other people; when you do that, pointing out the opinion of an idiot is the opinion of an idiot is actually a very valid thing to point out.

Your rating: None Average: 3.4 (5 votes)

Reading "Acton is on your ignore list" a bunch of times is less repetitive and more illuminating than the bigoted bloviation you're schooling him about. :)

Your rating: None Average: 3 (4 votes)

I don't "ignore list" anyone; it just feels too much like censoring someone.

Besides, if I was going to ignore someone, desiring_change would be well ahead of Acton (though since he never actually logs in, that's probably impossible). Anyway, Acton rarely actually responds to me; this is a rare instance where I, admittedly, did provoke him first. He's much easier for me to ignore the non-technologically assisted way than it is for you.

Also, I like arguing with stupid people. It makes me feel smart.

Your rating: None Average: 2.3 (4 votes)

It typically makes me feel the opposite, ironically.

Your rating: None Average: 4 (4 votes)

Haha. But it's not the "censor" list, it's the ignore list. It's like there's a loon shrieking on the sidewalk, and you're just closing the window instead of stuffing a sock in his mouth. (In this case it would take a size 6XL Hello Kitty sock, lavender.)

At least being a jerk to a bigot is better than being a bigot.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (2 votes)

Guys, you can answer his points or ignore them, but don't be jerks. It's not cool.

(And yes, I think there are points worthy of response there, though that's not to say I agree with them.)

Your rating: None

We probably deserved that.

Your rating: None Average: 3.3 (4 votes)

Pointing out the opinion of an idiot is the opinion of an idiot... it IS a very valid thing to point out. :)

Your rating: None Average: 2.3 (3 votes)

Well, we don't have to be so blunt about it; I had no intention of ever actually addressing his points, and was just teasing him, which was rude (though then he used the phrase "ad hominem" and then dropped the mic like that settled the argument, which is a personal pet peeve of mine, and I've been waiting for an opportunity to use that "debate with real people" line forever).

On the other hand, Green Reaper did just bluntly call us "jerks," which is an awfully rude way to call us out on rudeness. Awfully hypocritical, there, Green Reaper.

Your rating: None Average: 2.8 (5 votes)

Keep being blunt. “You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.” - Winston Churchill

Your rating: None Average: 1 (8 votes)

That makes no sense. talking about word salad you should be careful about throwing word salad stones in glass houses.

Your rating: None Average: 1.6 (8 votes)

I'm pretty ambivalent, I enjoy furry novels and comics. But I do my best to distance myself from the 'community'/'fandom', its a hobby, I really don't feel it has to impact on my upon my life as a whole.

Then again 'distancing myself' is simply not wearing a fucking tail and ears.

Those that do treat it like a lifestyle: Sad sad mother fuckers in my opinion, especially the 'mah spirit animal' crowd.

At best its a fetish.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (2 votes)

How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.

-Abraham Lincoln

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

Wait are you agreeing, or disagreeing with me?

I can't tell.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (5 votes)

Welcome to Flayrah.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (2 votes)

You know what, I honestly can't tell what Sonious's point was either, but your post is at 1.3 stars, so it's probably safe to assume everyone is your enemy.

Protip: Don't drop the f-bomb. No, the other one. Well, you shouldn't say that one either, but the last one in your post.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (4 votes)

A sensitive bunch aren't they.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

I don't vote on a majority of comments. My secret to life is not to worry so much about how others define a group. If someone asks me if I'm a furry, I'll ask them what their definition is first. If they give me an incorrect answer then I will simply say. "Then to you, I am not."

Your rating: None Average: 3 (4 votes)

I would like to point two things out in this article:

1) although reporting on said person being furry I don't disagree with, wording I do. I would put claims to be furry there instead of furry. Saying he is furry is admitting he is in fact our fandom, our crowd, and might be our norm. Claims to be furry gives the impression that he says he is, but we haven't really confirmed it.

2) The weird and creepy side of furry really comes from natgeo and G-4 (yeah, I watched their report on FWA, that was God awful.) Having documentaries done like that in that light makes the fandom seem more of, well, a fetish than an actual fandom. After all, there are millions of klingons out there, but only a few will insist on wearing the ears and doing the language in public for no apparent reason. However, most people associate Klingons with the fat guy in the star trek uniform speaking Klingon in line at Burger King when all you want him to do is order his freaking food and move so you can get a whopper!

Most people have not had this experience with either furry or Klingon. Most people couldn't name one person they know who is either. However, they get their impression of us from these documentaries.

Then we do the dumb "oh no where not that!" crap which re-enforces it. Just look up the 'furries in the media' panel that Uncle Kage does at some cons. That pretty much sums things up.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (2 votes)

Are we scaring away potential attendees? No, I would say more like we are attracting more of the element into the fandom that we don't want. More people who want to be accepted for their "activities" that they do, what ever they are. That much is for certain as the fandom has grown each time some News show has some come on about the scary people in the furry fandom. It also does not seem to hurt us when someone in the fandom comes forward for the news and says "well, all of fur suiters do this with our fur suits"

So, hey if you are into what your article is about. Post it. You will likely find more new people to join you in your hobby soon. So please encourage any article to be posted. Please allow anyone up to the microphone to speak for all of us.

Your rating: None Average: 3.7 (3 votes)

The original article is well rebutted. Google says a lot of things about a lot of people... so what.

The other thing nobody mentioned, is how the complaint is completely anecdotal. "My friends said..." If your friends drag you down, get new friends. If you want furries to be seen a certain way, be that way. It's a hobby, not a recruiting drive. Now I hope these articles drop off the front page soon so we can move on to some furry news.

Your rating: None Average: 2 (2 votes)

I want to give another angle : it not new members that are being scared, it is their siblings and parents. I am noticing the age of new furries getting younger around 14 and younger, the problem I am hearing is when their parents or siblings Google furry.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (4 votes)

Acton, it really doesn't matter who we're scaring; it's beside the point.

We're not really disagreeing that the story under scrutiny is bad publicity; we agree that cat screwing is not winning us any fans.

Our argument is that, from a journalistic viewpoint, it would be wrong to not run the story, regardless of consequences.

Your rating: None Average: 1 (2 votes)

Well it comes back do we want us to run the story or Huffington Post

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/17/furry-sex-crime-testicle-biting-fish-an...

3:00 in so typical uninformed tripe.

Your rating: None Average: 1 (2 votes)

Well, uh, we got both ...

So ... win/win?

Your rating: None Average: 4 (1 vote)

I believe that you don't have to be involved in the center of the fandom when you go by an animal like character over the internet as your avatar. But you're still a furry if you do it. And you might get fans from the mainstream fandom. If anthromorphic animals have a special place in you as a part of your personality then there should be nothing wrong with it. Like what colleges and schools do when they have a mascot like that. As long as you're not a criminal, jerk, or do crazy things that might get you negative reactions from other people, you should be fine.

It would be nice to see someone in a professional career who's a furry as long as other people don't mind.

Your rating: None

Well, I heard around the grapevine at work that a previous employee at the place I work was was a furry. They did get let go, but not because of the furry thing, mostly they were a bit argumentative with someone they should not have been.

Your rating: None Average: 2.3 (3 votes)

I actually got outed at my job as a furry doing stand-up (in which I was exaggerating the sexual aspects of furry for humorous effect) while wearing a company issued hat (that's a firable offense; in effect, by wearing the hat, I was accidentally implying I was a spokesperson for the company, and anything offensive I might have said in the act could have been taken as my company's saying it); turned out my manager was in the audience.

"I didn't know you did that."

"The stand-up or the furry thing?"

"Uh, well, both."

Basically, I didn't even get an official "warning," just "uh, don't wear the hat, we could get in trouble for that" (ironically, another comedian later gave me the advice "don't wear hats, period; people can't see your face"); I've always taken the stories of people fired for being furry with a grain of salt after that. The furries in question were probably fired because they were horrible employees; rather than deal with the issue, the furries blamed imaginary "discrimination."

The moral of the story is do your job well, and no one cares about what you do on the side. Also, don't wear hats while doing stand-up comedy.

Your rating: None

Now make that story a comedy routine. :3

Your rating: None Average: 1.7 (3 votes)

I know of one author that won't publish a sequel to his book because he doesn't want to be associated with the 'fandom'.

http://en.wikifur.com/wiki/The_Architect_of_Sleep

Having been 'enjoying' furry interest for as long as I have, I can hardly blame him.

Your rating: None Average: 3.6 (7 votes)

He sounds like a self-important douchebag. Any creator who outright trashes fans that way deserves to have their stuff pirated and treated as disposable. Oh, he's known for running a podcast... Good, nobody has to worry about paying him anyways.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

I don't know what comments Boyett has gotten from furry fans in particular, but it is not unusual for any author of a really popular story or series to be bugged to the point of madness by his/her fans for a sequel that he/she really does not want to write. Examples: Arthur Conan Doyle and Sherlock Holmes; L. Frank Baum and the Oz novels; Dean Koontz and "The Watchers". Look at all of the fan fiction about "Star Trek" or Disney's "The Lion King" or Don Bluth's "The Secret of NIMH" or "MLP:FIM" or how many Oz books there have been since the Oz copyrights have expired. Or authorized and unauthorized sequels to Margaret Mitchell's "Gone With the Wind". "Don Quixote" was originally written in two parts ten years apart, 1605 and 1615, and Miguel de Cervantes found several "part 2s" being written by fans, or by people just wanting to cash in on its popularity, until he finished the genuine part 2. (This was before copyrights, of course.) In what might be called the prehistoric age of furry fandom (1942), Fredric Brown's "The Star Mouse" got so many demands for a sequel that he finally wrote "Mitkey Rides Again" (1950) as a real stinker, just to shut his fans up. If he had really wanted to cash in on Mitkey, the talking mouse, he could have planned numerous sequels. So I wonder about Boyett's blaming furry fans in particular for his being bombarded by pleadings for more about his raccoon world.

Fred Patten

Your rating: None Average: 2.3 (3 votes)

No, being almost at ground zero for this fiasco, the author in question did not write a sequel to the series because he didn't want to become connected to the fandom, he did it to "spite" the myriad of a gaggle furry fanboys that pestered him about continuing the series, and some of the suggestions of what should transpire in the series.

Didn't mind the initial additional attention, got really sick and tired by a handful of extremely obnoxious %$#@&! who, eventually ruined for everybody. John K, Catlos King, Elizabeth Quentin, et al, suffered from this "symptom"

Stan Sakai is made of more stern stuff, and has had a longer dealing with the fandom, so he know s when to duck when the proverbial fan dumb caca hits the proverbial rapidly spinning device, and just deal with the sane, professional individuals in the fandom.

No, the author is not a "Douchebag", just somebody that got cornered against the wall.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (3 votes)

While I never met or communicated with Boyett myself, I enjoyed The Architect of Sleep enough that for a time I had hoped the sequels would see the light of day, and every now and then went poking around for any new developments in that regard. In reading over his various webpages and postings, many of which had nothing to do with Architect or furries, I got the distinct impression that he is a self-absorbed prick. In addition, while I don't doubt for a second that he may have been hounded by a few obnoxious fanboys, there have also been reports of much more civil and polite attempts to contact him with compliments, questions and comments about the story and its sequels, and those were responded to with the same kind of nasty rebuffs that should have been reserved for the fanboys.

Your rating: None Average: 4.5 (2 votes)

I don't know the author. He's local to me and we could have acquaintances in common. I can only judge by attitude of his comments, and it makes him look like a nasty, intolerant person.

John K, Catlos King, Elizabeth Quentin: I don't know who the latter two are. John K, I've been to his house. He has very good things to say about the dysfunction of TV business. There's also very good reasons that he lost a show and is known as difficult to work with. Just from that example, let's call it debatable to blame fanboys instead of creator personality. Temperamental prima donnas are not uncommon among gifted people.

Your rating: None Average: 3.2 (5 votes)

"I'm more likely to make the world happy by engineering a furry-specific
virus with a 99.99% mortality rate. Furries are the very reason the sumbitch
ain't getting finished in any medium now known or hitherto developed. I hate
them, Sam I Am."

You mean like this

Yes a twit indeed; Even I know as much I disagree with happens in the fandom, I can create an alternative meet or group. I am not going allow what I disagree with to stop me from being furry.

Your rating: None

I don't want to sound mean but:

"More importantly, why the need to display private (your sex life, orientation) and disturbing (man fucks his cat) things in front of everyone? Does the world really need to know that? Does it WANT to?"

"Still, I have one last thing to add. Think of all the young fans of anthropomorphics; fans who would surely enjoy joining a fandom of like-minded individuals. And yet, they hesitate, because they don't want to be seen close to a bunch of weirdos."

I really f***ing hate people who suggest people to remain in closets and remain sheep from societies bigotry bull who lacks any form of science these days. I mean that's all I see often, feeding off societies hatred instead of directly attacking there hatred, eh? For only one selfish side of furry who attacks others for who they are and call them "freaks" and feed the real trolls.

False stereotypes is bad for identities (Same if someone claim every furry (Or non-furry) was NOT like this too), but that and some other things is too far. And a bit mis info, I mean it's a news site, not a G rated site.

Edit: F*** I didn't notice EDITING this was going to make this back on the front page again. This isn't new. Damn it. I mean all I did was fix one letter/symbol and, oh god.

Diamond_Man.exe - Not real fursona
Science/Knowledge/Sense > Bias or Biased

Your rating: None Average: 1 (4 votes)

You need to understand that EVERYONE is a furry when they are five. And lots of people might like something like Bugs Bunny or Wacco and Jacco, but NOT because they are anthropomorphic animals. They just happen to be. I like Rocky and Bullwinkle. But I don't at any point admire humanized squirrels. Its a funny, well written show. You also have to understand why for most adults furries are creepy. Its NOT because we think they will have sex with an animal, even though thats horrifying. Its NOT because we think they are delusional enough to believe they really ARTe part cat, or whatever. Just the fact that someone wishes that they had fur growing all over their body, and had a feline face, whiskers, and cat paws is extremely insane. Admiring felines for their grace, strength and hunting skills is normal. Finding animals beautiful is normal. Finding a mishmash of man and animal attractive is NOT normal. Example; I find well crafted furniture to be beautiful. This does NOT mean I wish I was part sofa. I find wolves and tigers to be beautiful, and cats have many traits I admire, and would like to have. But I do NOT want to have fur on my body( thats why I shave my legs after all), I do not want to have whiskers. Having cat pupils would be kind of cool, and being able to see in the dark as they do I would not turn down. More to the point, I left my obsession with cuteness and cuddliness when I grew up. Being a furry means being mentally ill. It means you never left that phase, and you need therapy. Its CREEPY! Not for the sexual aspects, not because you really think you are a blue deer that wears a space suit or whatever. Its creepy for the same reason a fifty year old wearing pig tails, diaper, and sucking on a pacifier and sitting in a baby crib would be creepy.

Your rating: None

Too true. When I was around 5 years old (World War II was just ending), my favorite comic-book character was Sheldon Mayer's Amster the Hamster, a supporting character in Mayer's funny-animal comics for DC (I guess National Periodical Publications at the time) comics. Not because he was a hamster, or because he was a funny-animal, but because he was a short (like I was at 5 years old) con artist who could fast-talk all the bigger funny animals into ANYTHING. (I later found out that he was a funny-animal version of W. C. Fields.) At 5 years old, surrounded by bigger adults and older kids, I thought that this was a wonderful talent to have. I wanted to be just like Amster the Hamster. The fact that he was furry or that he wasn't human didn't seem important.

Fred Patten

Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

No offense, but normality doesn't exist other than "being yourself".
If someone believes in they want to be a real furry in spirituality, that's normal too.
It's not hurting anyone, and people need to realize that their lives of desires are not more important than others, or "better" or "worse".

Honestly, I want to be a different body, I am not one physically and I'm aware, but if someone believes in incarnation, etc. then that's normal too.
Calling someone insane and/or creepy for their own beliefs, IS insane.
The idea that it's only OK to just like, but restricting the freedom of liking is just wrong, and pathetic.

Your rating: None

Once to live and then the judgment. Eternal soul life or eternal soul death. You are judging yourself. That is good. People are not in their right mind condeming you calling you names.

Your rating: None Average: 3 (2 votes)

"To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."

― C.S. Lewis

tl;dr - Sorry about your arrested development. Have you considered therapy?

Post new comment

  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <img> <b> <i> <s> <blockquote> <ul> <ol> <li> <table> <tr> <td> <th> <sub> <sup> <object> <embed> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <dl> <dt> <dd> <param> <center> <strong> <q> <cite> <code> <em>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This test is to prevent automated spam submissions.

About the author

Mister Twister (Andrew V.)read storiescontact (login required)

    a stew-dent and Homo Somewhat Sapiens from US of A (east coast), interested in music (listening, collecting and preserving), drawing, 2d animation and i dunno what else.

    Bio - graphy... that "graph" of my "bio"...... what?