Creative Commons license icon

MTV 'Sex2K Special': Plushies & Furries

0
Your rating: None

Advertisement was seen on MTV, for Plushies and Furries

Yes folks, we're about to get trashed, again. Hang on, I'm sure it's going to be a bumpy ride.

Comments

Your rating: None

this is very old*noz* hmm i guess thay ran out of safe sex and music to play :| i really did not care for it :|

Your rating: None

I agree with Deuce's Redundant Post #6 as seen on FurryMUCK:

This has happened before, and won't really affect us.

I mean, it's not as if people have more important things to worry about or anything.

Your rating: None

For those who want a sneak preview, the producers have put up a website.

And... if that's not enough... next comes Rick Castro's book!

One way to find information about Rick is to visit his web page.

Your rating: None

Argh. Why does the media have to hype the negative side of everything?

"Thank you for flying Church of England, cake or death?"

Your rating: None

I didn't see this special,but by reading the
comments I can tell that someone out there
has nothing better to do than to degrade some
of us.I happen to be a furry artist that enjoys
his artas well as the next fur's art.Yiff I don't do
but suggestive is alrght as long as it doesn't hit right on the nail.Even if someone draws yiff,
it doesn't autmatically make then all out perves
child molesters or stuffy humpers.That's just like saying that because somebody has gay
friends or acquaintances it makes them gay too. Bunch of superficial stereotyping bastards
at MTV for so much as even presenting that garbage.If my friend likes to hump his stuffed
scooby doo doesn't mean I do.

Your rating: None

Because too few people are interested in presenting the positive side. And I'm not talking about journalists. They only write about (or videotape) what people show them. There are genuine hatchet jobs, like the Vanity Fair piece, but by and large journalists are simply looking for interesting stories. It seems the people who are willing to talk to journalists--maybe even seek them out, in some cases--are by and large people the rest of us might be a little (or a lot) uncomfortable with as spokesfurries. But if nobody else is willing to step up to the plate--if we all just go, "Oh, THE MEDIA is only interested in making us look like freaks, so we'd better never talk to any journalists"--we're giving the people who keep seeking that negative attention carte blanche to be our only representatives to the mainstream world.

Ducking the media is playing ostrich. These journalists aren't seeking us out looking for lurid stories. People are going to them with lurid stories. When people get journalists interested in non-lurid feature stories, the result is something like you'd see about a Star Trek convention--portraying the fans as weird, maybe, but mostly harmless. We've seen it before. It happened last Anthrocon. It happened the first Further Confusion--on NPR, no less. Years before, it happened with ConFurence.

We always scream about the lack of balance. But unless people start braving the rotten tomatoes to get up and say, "Well, actually 'furry' is about funny animal cartoons and science fiction comics, about pinup art and totem animals, about costuming and charity auctions, about The Lion King and The Blood Jaguar, about being a fandom community," where do we think the balance is going to come from?

- Chipotle

Your rating: None

We always scream about the lack of balance. But unless people start braving the rotten tomatoes to get up and say, "Well, actually 'furry' is about funny animal cartoons and science fiction comics, about pinup art and totem animals, about costuming and charity auctions, about The Lion King and The Blood Jaguar, about being a fandom community," where do we think the balance is going to come from?

People *did* say that, and some of those people got printed in the Vanity Fair article. The problem is that those people who like to have sex in fursuits or wank off with plushies are *also* part of the fandom -- it *is* "balance" to include them in the story. I don't see anyone standing up and telling them to stop talking to the press. Of course, "harmony at any cost" has always been the furry fandom's motto. You're not allowed to disagree publicly with anyone else's view of it.

Your rating: None

People *did* say that, and some of those people got printed in the Vanity Fair article. Responsible people + responsible media = Good articles about the fandom.The Vanity Fair article was mainly about two people, one of whom wasn't even at the convention. The reason the Vanity Fair article turned out the way it did was because George Gurley wasn't trying to write a good article.Y'know, I find a certain irony in your unwillingness to talk to the press on the one hand, and complaining about not being able to publically disagree on the other. My co-workers know I'm furry. One of them asked me about the MTV thing today. I sighed and said:"Yeah, I know. I saw it too. A lot of folks are upset about it because it didn't portray us accurately. It was mostly about that one kid."That took me about 15 seconds to say. She understood, and that was it. I thought afterward I had probably done more to improve the fandom's image in that 15 seconds than Burned Fur did in its entire existance. And it was easy. I don't understand why this is so hard for people to do. If stuff like the Vanity Fair article and the MTV Special don't represent you, then just say so.

Your rating: None

Y'know, I find a certain irony in your unwillingness to talk to the press on the one hand, and complaining about not being able to publically disagree on the other.

What I meant was, in the furry fandom you're not allowed to say, "You know, xxxx aren't really part of the fandom." (Where xxxx is bestialists or Sub/Dom fiends or whatever.) You're not allowed to ostracize anyone for inappropriate behavior. There's an unwritten rule that we have to embrace all comers with open arms, and that's the source of a lot of trouble.

Your rating: None

There's an unwritten rule that we have to embrace all comers with open arms, and that's the source of a lot of trouble.Who says you have to embrace everyone? For that matter, who says you have to ostracize them either? What's wrong with just supporting the things you like and hanging around with the people you want to hang around with?People keep focusing on the things they don't want associated with the fandom, and ignoring the things they do. They say they don't want furry fandom associated with weird kinks and fetishes, but they go out of their way to find it and drag it out in the spotlight for everyone---including the media---to see.I don't think anyone has to accept bestiality or Scientology or banana fondling or anything else with open arms. Those things are not what furry fandom is about. Which brings us to the real crux of the issue: The problem with arguing with people about non-fandom things is that they're going to argue right back. Instead of folks getting together and sharing an interest in anthropomorphic animals, there's folks getting together and arguing about things that have nothing to do with anthropomorphic animals.A negative article comes out, and people run around yelling that 'xxxx' are taking over the fandom. Consider how that statement looks to an outsider. It makes it look as though all of us are 'xxxx', even though the article is only about one of them.On the same side of the coin, stuff like this does nothing to help our image. Yet the same folks who complain when a negative article comes out also point to things like this and laugh and say how true it is. Again, consider how that looks to an outsider.It'd be nice if people could get along instead of trying to make people feel unwelcome.1 We could accomplish a lot more by working together. The only way that's going to happen is when people finally recognize not everyone in the fandom is the same as them---nor should they be.1 This is not meant to imply that inappropriate behavior is "acceptable". I have nothing against public decorum. But that's a whole other issue.

Your rating: None

People keep focusing on the things they don't want associated with the fandom, and ignoring the things they do. They say they don't want furry fandom associated with weird kinks and fetishes, but they go out of their way to find it and drag it out in the spotlight for everyone---including the media---to see.

It seems to me the people with the kinks and fetishes do an awfully good job putting *themselves* in the spotlight. The rest of us are then left with either not associating with the fandom, or being thought of as another one of those people. There's not much we can do about it when the fandom has attention-craving plushophiles, bestialists, porn artists, etc. who feel it's their duty to spread their personal view of the fandom with the world. Don't get me wrong -- if people want to engage in those activities, that's their right. But they should have the decency to realize that they shouldn't be shown off in front of cameras and they shouldn't drag the rest of us into them by saying they're part of being 'furry'.

IMHO furriness should be a quiet, personal pursuit. 'Normal' people aren't going to understand it anyway, so trying to evangelize to them will only lead to problems. Too much bad press comes from people eager to spread the Furry Gospel.

Your rating: None

It seems to me the people with the kinks and fetishes do an awfully good job putting *themselves* in the spotlight.

I've seen plenty of instances where folks who don't want this stuff associated with furry fandom actively seek it out, and make it public because they feel that's the only way they can "do something about it". What's the point in the fetish crowd being discreet if these guys are just gonna drag it out in the open?

Don't get me wrong -- if people want to engage in those activities, that's their right. But they should have the decency to realize that they shouldn't be shown off in front of cameras and they shouldn't drag the rest of us into them by saying they're part of being 'furry'.

True, and the fact is most of them don't get in front of the cameras. Most of them, in fact, just want to be left alone. Just because someone has fetishes doesn't mean they're trying to redefine furry to include them.There's always going to be a few folks who think "freaking the mundanes" is a barrel of laughs, but keep in mind "freaking the mundanes" isn't limited to just the fetish crowd, nor do they necessarily support it.

Your rating: None

"There is no cause so pure, no organization so noble, that a reporter can't find a raving lunatic who proports to be an adherent."

Add the law of supply and demand, i.e., a significant fraction of the population with tune to your network to be shocked by anything that's promo-ed as sufficiently weird, and here we are.

And now that I think of it, there ought to be a corrolary to Niven's maxim above: "There is no action, comment, or joke which can't be taken out of context and shown in the worst possible light by a properly motivated person."

Your rating: None

Oh, I forgot that any rhetorical question is taken as a serious inquiry...hmm...that's why I left the newsgroups.

"Thank you for flying Church of England, cake or death?"

Your rating: None

I'm a "normal" who just saw the Sex2K Special. I'll admit that I laughed and laughed and laughed, but I ultimately I think what you got going on is alright by me. Its looks like a harmless outlet, everybody has a good time and no one gets hurt--what's wrong with that? Kisses and good wishes to all of you enjoying your freedom to express yourself-

Your rating: None

Why is a "normal" reading Flayrah?

I'm just curious. Didja do a web search on the term "furry" or something?

Your rating: None

NOTE: THIS ISN'T A FLAME... However I AM inflamed with anger.

Thursday night I saw sex2k on MTV about the subject "Plushies And Furries". I couldn't believe they didn't get the complete story about our culture/lifestyle. They just covered the fandom (30%), lingo (5%), and confurences (15%). They only covered the sex involvments, the coming of terms of a fur with his mother, and actually showed yiffing actually going on! That was the other 50%.

Was it neccessary it show only furrydom as a stinkin' reference to sex? Yes... AND no. They should've shown from all sides of the story, not just the sexual references. It's the comeraderie of those who chose to be themselves. It's sharing an interest that encompasses those of similar interest, and not entirely referring to SEX and YIFFING.

Being furry is not a lifestyle... it's a choice. I chose to be a furry out of pure CHOICE. Why should someone like MTV or Vanity Fair say something like that? That is what makes the Burned Furs case... and I'm NOT a member!

I became a furry through choice. And I'll stay one as long as I'll live. I may not have a fursuit, nor access to the computer enough to MUCK or IRC (yet!), but I'm still considering myself a furry. And let those who smear the name be met with our turning our noses/snouts/beaks to the air, and snubbing them for the ignorant fools that are.

For those who don't understand ARE.

This isn't a flame. It's my speaking my mind.

The wallaroo turns and bounds away into the darkness.

Your rating: None

I agree 100% with you brother about
your criticism of MTV so called free expression
of our subculture. With what you hear
outsider might think we're pedophiles. but
just human who are unique in everyway.
but I'm not surprised if you look at history
all cultural things from hippies, impressionism, rock&roll we're consider
bad but improve are lives and furrism
will be no different.

Your rating: None

Uhm, the show is called "Sex2k". Of course all they're going to cover is the sexual side of the fandom. They don't give a crap about the rest of it.

As for the 'actual yiffing', all they showed was two fursuiters rubbing against each other while in fursuits. No naughty bits were exposed.

Your rating: None

Allright, time for me to make my comment.

Firstly, is this a flame? I dunno.. am I as mad as hell about what happened with this show? Yes. Why? Because people take this show and they get themselves worked up over it. Now some of the people that get worked up over it are GOOD people that help the regular community. Hell I know people who work for childrens hospitals who see this kind of crap and get VERY upset.. what happens if they decide to pull out and not help these kids anymore.. who loses out? The kids!

Basically this is my stand on it. If someone sees the special and asks me if I am like that.. a mundane lets say.. I will say no. Why? Because it's none of their damned business what the hell I do outside of work/school.I don't want to be branded , labelled and or classified.. I want to be left the fuck alone. Just because I don't want to drink beer, rape women and drive a fast looking expensive car doesn't mean i should be ostracized for it.

Anyway, that's my two cents.

Johnny Blanco

Your rating: None

Right on, Johnny. Right on! :)

The wallaroo turns and bounds away into the darkness.

Your rating: None

...that I hate the word "mundane" and the false sense of superiority it implies.

Your rating: None


...that I hate the word "mundane" and the false sense of superiority it implies.

AMEN. There's nothing quite like antagonizing the people you're complaining so much about needing/desiring the acceptance of.

(Feren, who is trapped at work for another 15 minutes and can't remember his password)

Your rating: None

Actually I'ld just like to ask. I have some how lost what I had written before. I am trying to understand, from somone not trying to get public acclaim for their "fetish" (Sorry I couldn't think of a better way to put.)(i.e. the MTV thing), about what ya'll are about. I've seen the artwork many times before, but for some reason beyond the goddess, I never realized their was a fan base for it. I write on my website about various lifestyles and why people choose to live them. I began doing this after some stranger asked me why I choose to be Goth and couldn't for the life of me figure out how to explain it. Of course ,always and forever, the first thing people ask is about the "sexual deviancy" of the lifestyle. I could care less about that. I just want to understand "Why?". What is it that attracts you to it? Where did you first hear about it? Do you ever talk to your friends about it? How does it affect your life? If I am intruding please let me know and I'll leave. I just know that I have seen many articals on various topics that I am involved in that made me so angry with there callous misrepresantation of a lifestyle that I just wanted to scream "WHAT IS YA'LLS PROBLEM"! People just want a black and white view of the world and not the many shades inbetween. You can email me if you like at avangelinewolf@angelfire.com and check out my website at http://www.angelfire.com/sc/Gothika

Your rating: None

heya...i saw ur email on Flayrah.....im 18, i live in Pennsylvania....if u want, email me at insaneskunk@yahoo.com ..

Mrrreeeooowww ((Lee))

Your rating: None

It's funny how it effects some people and not others, and vice versa. One would think that I, of all furries out there, wouldn't and shouldn't get bothered about it...

But I did.

Around the time that whole Vanity Fair thing happened, I got an Anonymous Email from someone...He /She was pretty rude to me...I don't remember everything they said, but they basically told me that I was a sick, pervert who likes drawing yiffy pics and doing it with stuffed animals to get my jollies.

Anyone who knows me, also knows that I'm a dedicated G-rated artist. Meaning that I wouldn't draw yiff if you paid me a million dollars. Call me a fur with high morals, but I just don't feel right drawing yiff...I've never drawn yiff and never will, nor do I look at it. But, that's just me.

It bothers me because people are now branding me as a "pervert who draws yiff, gets their jollies with plushies, etc etc" when I don't even do that kind of stuff.

I'm a furry artist...A Clean Furry Artist. I enjoy drawing furries, but I don't like getting branded like this.

HollyAnn,
Furry Artist since 1997
http://www.ki-tera.com/hollyann/

Your rating: None

I differ on that a bit. I happen to be a straight, successful graphics designer, _do_ drive a nice car, and keep myself in good physical condition.

I also like anthro artwork, and I do _not_ hide from the fact that sex is a part of life, and that adults can deal with it. (nor do I use the term 'yiff', which to me, is utterly juvenile). If you don't want to draw adult artwork for personal reasons, fine, but I also happen to have a lot of artist friends who _do_ draw adult work...because they think it's fun, and they're also all quite normal, fun individuals who dress well and act normally in public and have normal relationships.

Daring to admit that you like any adult stuff doesn't automatically turn you into a degenerate, socially-retarded loser, they have their own, unique qualifications. (Though this idea is lost on some people in this fandom who decry 'smut artists' with one hand's vitriolic writing, while buying all the furry porn they can in private with the other, methinks they doth protest too much...)

It just means, to a lot of people, that you're an adult who can deal with sex as a part of life. So unless you're the sort who posts furry porn in inapppropriate places such as your office, in which case you _do_ deserve to be labeled, because you're socially inept... don't worry about it. If you live as a normal person, keep 'furry' stuff in its place, 'mundane' stuff in its place...nobody is going to label you.

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.